Just fire 2 blasts outside your window
-
@eViLegion said:
jihad
That word does not mean what you think it means.
-
@rad131304 said:
@eViLegion said:
jihad
That word does not mean what you think it means.Well, perhaps it's a clumsy application of the term; though it can be argued that since the perception is of Christians shooting Muslims, that the conflict is a direct manifestation of 'struggle for God'.
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.
-
@eViLegion said:
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.
Better than this (possibly NSFW)?
"By the third time… I was like, you know, this is gratuitous. I do not need to see any more mayonnaise enemas for the rest of my lifetime."
I'm happy to have met my quota at zero, though I'd prefer to not have heard of such a thing at all.
-
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
So, because other people misuse the word to build a straw man, that makes it OK for you to do it?@eViLegion said:
jihad
That word does not mean what you think it means.Well, perhaps it's a clumsy application of the term; though it can be argued that since the perception is of Christians shooting Muslims, that the conflict is a direct manifestation of 'struggle for God'.
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.
-
@boomzilla said:
@eViLegion said:
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.
Better than this (possibly NSFW)?
"By the third time… I was like, you know, this is gratuitous. I do not need to see any more mayonnaise enemas for the rest of my lifetime."
I'm happy to have met my quota at zero, though I'd prefer to not have heard of such a thing at all.
I'm at work, so I'm not clicking that link. But I suspect that mayonnaise enemas probably feature in more porn than one might otherwise suspect. At least the consistency is a closer approximation than using milk.
-
@rad131304 said:
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
So, because other people misuse the word to build a straw man, that makes it OK for you to do it?@eViLegion said:
jihad
That word does not mean what you think it means.Well, perhaps it's a clumsy application of the term; though it can be argued that since the perception is of Christians shooting Muslims, that the conflict is a direct manifestation of 'struggle for God'.
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.What straw man? There really are a lot of angry Muslims who see the conflict in terms of jihad. Also, you're still arguing semantics, and not refuting the point of the sentence... Do you not think being angry and spoiling for a fight is an expect reaction to armed invasion and being bombed?
-
I'm not sure I want to click that link. Is there a purpose to mayonnaise enemas, or are they just for fun?
-
@eViLegion said:
I'm not sure I want to click that link. Is there a purpose to mayonnaise enemas, or are they just for fun?
It's part of some sort of art festival in Canada. The performers say they want people to think about uncomfortable or embarrassing things regarding the human body, or something. Mostly, I thought it would be a nice derailment, as we're going around in circles here.
Alternatively, TDWTFers may be dismayed to find out that we've hunted dildoes (presumably including the purple kind) to extinction.
-
@boomzilla said:
@eViLegion said:
I'm not sure I want to click that link. Is there a purpose to mayonnaise enemas, or are they just for fun?
It's part of some sort of art festival in Canada. The performers say they want people to think about uncomfortable or embarrassing things regarding the human body, or something. Mostly, I thought it would be a nice derailment, as we're going around in circles here.
Alternatively, TDWTFers may be dismayed to find out that we've hunted dildoes (presumably including the purple kind) to extinction.
And yet Dragon Dildos (I'll insert the link once I get off work) seem to be flourishing in captivity.
-
-
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
Check the tags. It might explain.@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
So, because other people misuse the word to build a straw man, that makes it OK for you to do it?@eViLegion said:
jihad
That word does not mean what you think it means.Well, perhaps it's a clumsy application of the term; though it can be argued that since the perception is of Christians shooting Muslims, that the conflict is a direct manifestation of 'struggle for God'.
Either way, it's arguing semantics. It's still a good reason for them to fight back.What straw man? There really are a lot of angry Muslims who see the conflict in terms of jihad. Also, you're still arguing semantics, and not refuting the point of the sentence... Do you not think being angry and spoiling for a fight is an expect reaction to armed invasion and being bombed?
-
@rad131304 said:
Check the tags. It might explain.
Oh I see. Losing an argument? Quick! Pretend you're trolling, then they won't think you're a lightweight. Works every time.
-
@boomzilla said:
I thought it would be a nice derailment, as we're going around in circles here.
Good call!
Although, I do really like arguing with you guys here, because it's guaranteed that someone will bring a full bodied opposition to the table.
:o)
-
@blakeyrat said:
I believe this is the first I've heard the argument that deposing dictators is somehow a bad thing.
Interestingly, sometime the US supports dictators, sometimes it deposes them. Is this democracy in action?
Lets talk about Iran again. Supporting the Shah was right? The version of democracy that Iran has now is wrong? How about the Congo. Patrice Lumumba was the first legally elected prime minister of the DRC, who was assassinated with the assistance of the CIA - and replaced with a dictator. Is this the type of democracy the US likes?
-
@scudsucker said:
@blakeyrat said:
I believe this is the first I've heard the argument that deposing dictators is somehow a bad thing.
Interestingly, sometime the US supports dictators, sometimes it deposes them. Is this democracy in action?
Lets talk about Iran again. Supporting the Shah was right? The version of democracy that Iran has now is wrong? How about the Congo. Patrice Lumumba was the first legally elected prime minister of the DRC, who was assassinated with the assistance of the CIA - and replaced with a dictator. Is this the type of democracy the US likes?'Democratic' governments are the ones that play ball. 'Dictatorships' are the ones that don't. The actual form of government is irrelevant.
-
I was editing my response, when I saw the thread had effectively crawled up its own arse and come full circle, but CS killed my edit.
Therefore in the spirit of reconciliation and derailment, may I present an example of an American* that everybody can hate: A sexy surprise for Adult Vegans ( NSFW for concept, not for content, but I wouldn't open this at work anyway )- The guy may be Canadian, I'm not familiar enough with North American accents to tell.
-
-
@scudsucker said:
Therefore in the spirit of reconciliation and derailment, may I present an example of an American* that everybody can hate: A sexy surprise for Adult Vegans ( NSFW for concept, not for content, but I wouldn't open this at work anyway )
What's the deal with "carnist?" If anyone's a carnist it's a vegan. I used to have a shirt that said "Vegans Suck." Apparently it should have said "Vegans Lick."
-
@boomzilla said:
What's the deal with "carnist?"
It appears to be a pejorative term vegans use for non-vegans. At least that what it appears to be from the UD definition clearly written by a 'vegist' - two can play at that game.
It certainly hasn't made it to Merriam's or the OED. Yet.
-
@PJH said:
@boomzilla said:
What's the deal with "carnist?"
It appears to be a pejorative term vegans use for non-vegans. At least that what it appears to be from the UD definition clearly written by a 'vegist' - two can play at that game.
It certainly hasn't made it to Merriam's or the OED. Yet.I get what he meant by it. But if you're racist, you're against certain races. Sexes, certain sexes. Etc. So carnist seems like it should be someone who doesn't like meat, i.e., a vegan. Honestly, I could care less.
-
What if I'm a chemist?
"bloodmouth" is also a nice one.
-
@dhromed said:
What if I'm a chemist?
Arsonist? Alarmist? Bigamist? There are so many...
Anyway, vegans are idiots - what do you expect from them?
-
@PJH said:
Anyway, vegans are idiots - what do you expect from them?
I think once every 11 years hardly allows you to label an entire group ;)
-
@dhromed said:
@PJH said:
Anyway, vegans are idiots - what do you expect from them?
I think once every 11 years hardly allows you to label an entire group ;)
But these people spit in the face of nature! That's like stepping on Superman's cape or messing around with Jim. Idiots.
-
Eh, what the hell, I'll chime in.
Firstly, had the US stuck to a purely "not my problem" attitude, I suspect most of Europe would be speaking German, if not the United States as well by now. The fact that we choose to intercept and destroy threats when they are smaller and more easily removed is not arrogance, it's intelligence. In the case of the Iraq war, no, no weapons were ever found but that doesn't change the fact that literally EVERY SINGLE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY on the face of the Earth thought that they did, which is reinforced by the fact that Saddam used biological weapons against his own ctiizenry. Not to mention the fact that "building a coalition" that we didn't need had us sitting in the fucking UN for months on end with our thumb in our collective ass gave him more than enough time to have anything he may have had destroyed, hidden, or worse, sold.
And more importantly, we didn't shoot first. Regardless of prior political actions in the region, the radical Islamist groups have routinely exhibited irrational hatred toward any western civilization, especially Israel. Over the course of many, many, many years (preceeding the UN by a good long while) the Arabs, especially Palestinians, have openly and proudly declared hatred of the Jews, responded to every attempt to create a partitioned nation with more violence against them, and waged a war which they ultimately got their asses kicked so badly that they LOST territory in, and now whine at the international community like a little bully who got his ass kicked when he messed with the wrong kid. Yes, many many Muslims are peaceful people, I know many who I'd consider friends. Doesn't change the fact that the fundamentalists in their religion are absolutely crazy, and unfortunately, unlike the crazies in mine like Westboro, they aren't content with protesting and shouting their ridiculousness, they feel the need to destroy things. And so must be destroyed. To be blunt, I think a society that stones women for being raped and hangs homosexuals from construction cranes is one we could, as a species, get along without.
And the intervention versus non-intervention is exactly as moot as implied. Every little shitsplat country on the planet that gets on the losing end of one of their pathetic wars goes crying to the UN for help. And since the UN's military force is almost exclusively from the United States, we are routinely set with the role of the planetary police. Yes, this means we get into weird shit like installing dictators and revamping Governments. The fact of the matter is, throughout history there has been no previous such actions; if a country invaded another, the latter of the two either ceased to exist entirely, or became a province. We go in, blow shit up, put it back together as best we can, and try to leave things better than they were. Is it perfect? No, but we could've easily annexed Iraq, taken the oil, burn every mosque to the ground, and there would not have been JACK. SHIT. anyone could've done about it. But that's not how we operate, which is not something you can say about Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Syria, and the rest of these sand drenched hell holes who routinely have to bomb their own populations just to stay somewhat stable.
-
@dhromed said:
I think once every 11 years hardly allows you to label an entire group ;)
They have some catching up to do when non-vegans accidentally poison thousands of pets annually.
-
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
Well, no, I stopped because you are willfully ignoring certain facts to fit your narrative of "who is wrong" and you don't seem interested in any of the points that I've brought up to refute your version of the events. There is no "argument" anymore. We're talking past each other. Since everything we say here will have profound effects on the middle east as a whole, I'm going back to doing things that make me money. Have fun!Check the tags. It might explain.
Oh I see. Losing an argument? Quick! Pretend you're trolling, then they won't think you're a lightweight. Works every time.
-
@Master Chief said:
In the case of the Iraq war, no, no weapons were ever found but that doesn't change the fact that literally EVERY SINGLE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY on the face of the Earth thought that they did, which is reinforced by the fact that Saddam used biological weapons against his own ctiizenry. Not to mention the fact that "building a coalition" that we didn't need had us sitting in the fucking UN for months on end with our thumb in our collective ass gave him more than enough time to have anything he may have had destroyed, hidden, or worse, sold.
Interestingly, there was a lot of traffic from Iraq into Syria prior to the war. And guess who's using chemical weapons now!
-
@boomzilla said:
@Master Chief said:
In the case of the Iraq war, no, no weapons were ever found but that doesn't change the fact that literally EVERY SINGLE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY on the face of the Earth thought that they did, which is reinforced by the fact that Saddam used biological weapons against his own ctiizenry. Not to mention the fact that "building a coalition" that we didn't need had us sitting in the fucking UN for months on end with our thumb in our collective ass gave him more than enough time to have anything he may have had destroyed, hidden, or worse, sold.
Interestingly, there was a lot of traffic from Iraq into Syria prior to the war. And guess who's using chemical weapons now!
Oh, cmon. As if making chemical weapons is a specialized task that requires international smuggling.
That's one of the things that irritates most people about the Iraq war. The incredibly lame attempt to stretch some pretty bog-standard (if horrifying) chemical weapons into scary and dangerous WMDs on par with nuclear bombs. (Granted, I think the hysteria over nukes is overblown anyway, but at least they're newish and DO require a sophisticated tech infrastructure.) I mostly supported the war in Iraq, but watching Colin Powell try to deliver that speech to the UN like a low-rent copy of Adlai Stevenson was just painful. Just be honest and say Saddam is an asshole who used up his last get out of jail free card at the wrong time.
-
@Snooder said:
a low-rent copy of Adlai Stevenson
TRWTF is that people think Adlai Stevenson was some kind of intellectual.
-
@rad131304 said:
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
Well, no, I stopped because you are willfully ignoring certain facts to fit your narrative of "who is wrong" and you don't seem interested in any of the points that I've brought up to refute your version of the events. There is no "argument" anymore. We're talking past each other. Since everything we say here will have profound effects on the middle east as a whole, I'm going back to doing things that make me money. Have fun!Check the tags. It might explain.
Oh I see. Losing an argument? Quick! Pretend you're trolling, then they won't think you're a lightweight. Works every time.
Did I forget to file that under trollin trollin trollin? I do apologise! :oP
-
@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
Ah sorry, I mistook you for somebody who wasn't a complete shithead. I won't make that mistake again.@eViLegion said:
@rad131304 said:
Well, no, I stopped because you are willfully ignoring certain facts to fit your narrative of "who is wrong" and you don't seem interested in any of the points that I've brought up to refute your version of the events. There is no "argument" anymore. We're talking past each other. Since everything we say here will have profound effects on the middle east as a whole, I'm going back to doing things that make me money. Have fun!Check the tags. It might explain.
Oh I see. Losing an argument? Quick! Pretend you're trolling, then they won't think you're a lightweight. Works every time.
Did I forget to file that under trollin trollin trollin? I do apologise! :oP
-
@rad131304 said:
Ah sorry, I mistook you for somebody who wasn't a complete shithead. I won't make that mistake again.
Sense of humour failure doesn't suit you.
-
@Snooder said:
@boomzilla said:
@Master Chief said:
In the case of the Iraq war, no, no weapons were ever found but that doesn't change the fact that literally EVERY SINGLE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY on the face of the Earth thought that they did, which is reinforced by the fact that Saddam used biological weapons against his own ctiizenry. Not to mention the fact that "building a coalition" that we didn't need had us sitting in the fucking UN for months on end with our thumb in our collective ass gave him more than enough time to have anything he may have had destroyed, hidden, or worse, sold.
Interestingly, there was a lot of traffic from Iraq into Syria prior to the war. And guess who's using chemical weapons now!
Oh, cmon. As if making chemical weapons is a specialized task that requires international smuggling.
That's one of the things that irritates most people about the Iraq war. The incredibly lame attempt to stretch some pretty bog-standard (if horrifying) chemical weapons into scary and dangerous WMDs on par with nuclear bombs. (Granted, I think the hysteria over nukes is overblown anyway, but at least they're newish and DO require a sophisticated tech infrastructure.) I mostly supported the war in Iraq, but watching Colin Powell try to deliver that speech to the UN like a low-rent copy of Adlai Stevenson was just painful. Just be honest and say Saddam is an asshole who used up his last get out of jail free card at the wrong time.
Having the weapons isn't the issue. Using him on his own citizenry, which he has made completely defenseless to secure their compliance in virtually every aspect of life, is. He was a fucking psychopath and nobody misses him.
-
@Master Chief said:
He was a fucking psychopath and nobody misses him.
That's an outright lie. The Sunni minority miss him. They're being butchered by the vengeful Shia majority in a sectarian civil war. Saddam was an evil, horrible person. But to argue the utter chaos and constant death America left instead of him is bullshit. America took a shitty country and made it shittier. And act like they were doing the Iraqis a favour. Sickening.
-
@boomzilla said:
And like I said, it's not our fault that other countries don't value their sovereignty.
Well, we do. That's why a significant part of the European population is unhappy about the development of the EU.
-
@xaade said:
And people continue to bash Bush on the war in Iraq, whereas no one worldwide says a thing against Obama doing much worse.
You obviously haven't read any European newspaper in the past few months. Obama has lost our sympathies a long time ago.
-
@boomzilla said:
@eViLegion said:
No other countries have created a similar act about Guantanamo bay, which is clearly not legal in any way, shape or form.
Wow. What a stupid statement. What's illegal about it in any way, shape or form?
I honestly don't get why some of you guys are still trying to defend Guantanamo. There is simply no moral justification for keeping those people, many of whom provably neither actively participated in any war nor committed any crime, imprisoned without trial. Yes, there are legal loopholes which allow you to do so, but let's be honest: Most prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are nothing more and nothing less than scapegoats who suffer for 9/11.
-
@anonymous_guy said:
Most prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are nothing more and nothing less than scapegoats who suffer for 9/11.
What about Harold and Kumar?
-
@joe.edwards said:
@anonymous_guy said:
Most prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are nothing more and nothing less than scapegoats who suffer for 9/11.
What about Harold and Kumar?Never watched that movie. Did I miss something?
-
@anonymous_guy said:
@joe.edwards said:
Just the opportunity to squander an hour and a half of your life.@anonymous_guy said:
Never watched that movie. Did I miss something?Most prisoners in Guantanamo Bay are nothing more and nothing less than scapegoats who suffer for 9/11.
What about Harold and Kumar?
