All Women Hate Guns
Guns are awesome. In fact, a gun is the manliest thing there is.
I take that back. The manliest thing there is would be a hot car or some kind of super motorcycle with guns attached to it. In that case, it’s a case of chicken and egg. Is the car manlier because of the guns or are the guns manlier because of the car? What about a tank? Where does it play into this manly game?
Wherever the fuck it wants. It’s a tank.
All men like guns and think they’re the greatest thing that has ever happened to man-humanity. Did you know that without guns 99% of people would be slaves? Guns ended slavery and that’s 100% true.
Before the invention of the gun, mankind lived in a feudal society. I have seen the film Braveheart many times and I become more and more certain each time I see it that feudal life was fucked. You can thank guns for the end of that dicketry.
As a man, it is only natural you thank things for what they’ve done for you. If you were a woman, you would have to figure out some way to have sex with the invention of the gun. That’s the only way women show their gratitude: lackluster sex.
Oh wait, I’m just kidding because all women hate guns and would never thank them.
Like most everything that’s good for them, women hate guns. It could be because they’re loud. Women hate loud things don’t they? Things like fun parties, and football games, and little yappy, worthless dogs that give them an excuse to refer to themselves as “mommy” about six years too soon. No, that can’t be it. Maybe women hate guns because they’re complicated — guns mind you. Not women. Women are as simple broken vending machines. No matter what you put into them, you don’t get anything you want.
Guns have moving parts and require care-taking. Recently, I heard a female comedian say vaginas are complicated though, so that’s probably not the reason. I could hear her saying it crystal clear too because no one was laughing.
The truth is that women enjoy being in danger. That’s why they hate guns. Guns are safe so women hate them. It’s logic. Without guns you, me, and everyone in the world would be on constant alert for the Hun Alarm that would jolt us out of bed in the middle of the night and let us eloquently know our whole town was about to get burned to the goddamn ground.
Thank guns and thank your man military that doesn’t happen.
That’s also why women love safety belts so much. Safety belts are dangerous just like guns aren’t. They make women drive like chimpanzees on speed with absolutely no regard for anyone’s personal safety. Have you ever seen a woman drive without a safety belt? No. And you’ve never seen a woman drive worth a shit.
I rest my case.
Related Articles:
October 6th, 2006 at 6:21 pm - IP Man-Hash: b93fb87b17d4a
A fuckin men.
October 6th, 2006 at 11:04 pm - IP Man-Hash: 68cb7479382dc
As fate would have it, I was just looking at guns today. They truly are a manly thing.
October 7th, 2006 at 4:05 am - IP Man-Hash: 49c9ff889fded
One would think the biggest proponents of guns would be women. Guns being one of the best equalizers out there. But like dick said, women must like being in danger.
October 7th, 2006 at 5:51 am - IP Man-Hash: eab4c21bb6be5
Perhaps that explains why they prefer to date men who beat them so much. Maybe the danger of dying from domestic violence is what attracts them and keeps them in such relationships.
I use the words perhaps and maybe because I do not know for sure. As i am not a woman, I can only guess why a human being would be so stupid.
October 7th, 2006 at 6:27 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Nope, actually trance music is the manliest thing that be. With the Topol truck a hair width second.
October 7th, 2006 at 7:58 am - IP Man-Hash: 80a6050cf69ac
Women hate guns for the same reasons they hate any liberating and equalizing technology and the achieving males that created them. Who knows what the fuck those reasons are, I’m not a female.
Just like how women marry achievers for their money then rape him in divorce court and move in some thug with tats to warp their children for life.
Or, they have an entire gaggle of kids by the thug first, live off welfare and shit jobs until they find some poor naive hardworking man to take care of them.
Either way when you deal with women for anything other than a fuck you end up raped and pillaged.
October 7th, 2006 at 11:21 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
I think you’ve wound up proving Dick’s point. What is a nuclear missile but the biggest gun going? And one mounted on a truck that a pair of chaps can drive around — what could be more manly?
Except maybe this vehicle. Nearly 50 year old design, and still used today. And helps launch one of the biggest projectiles there is. Not great gas mileage though. No airbags, and doesn’t meet California emission standards. I think it’d be safe in most collisions though.
Indeed. It’s as though guns, like phonics and calculators were made by kindly men to help out women… except of course women proved inadept and ungrateful.
-wolfe
October 7th, 2006 at 11:31 am - IP Man-Hash: a8cd80253d019
In a similar fashion men seem to, no they actually, repeatedly, date women who treat them like shit - let’s face it there are a ‘handful’ of ‘good’ men and women still in existence, so why does anyone have to settle for someone who is not a ‘worthy opponent’/'partner in crime’/'dynamic duo material’/etc.
My point being that men are guilty of making the same mistake(s) over and over, choosing the obviously ‘wrong’ mate - why else would you dinks flock to this site to whine and complain [like girls] about how horrible women are and how ‘hard done by’ you lot are.?.?.
So now you’re accusing women of being abusive in way that is equivalent to the male-originated abuse that you berate women for putting up with - I guess you guys are just as much suckers for punishment as the women that you claim get stuck in pathetic holding patterns…not without the ability to escape/take control, but the lack of desire to do so.
“Hello ‘pot’, ‘kettle’ here, you seem more ‘black’ all the time…but I guess monkey-see-monkey-do has always been your m.o. of choice and we women have no reason to expect/hope for you to ever be anything but finger pointing cock-a-doodle-do’s who have always been so intimidated/influenced/swayed by the same t&a you profess to detest yet will fuck nonetheless [not to mention nonethemore than you can muster those pathetic stand-to's you call erections].
October 7th, 2006 at 12:50 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Correction. In retrospective, I meant the Topol’s truck. The Maz.
I find the thought of usage of nuclear weapons abhorrent. I view as the morally correct course of action, nay - obligation, for any half decent human being to disavow any and all orders to launch, ever, if in the position to have received orders in the first place - being an operator of a given launch system (nuc. sub, mobile land based platform, silo, etc.) or having the actual capability of physically transposing the launch order.
In fact, if given the chance I would also attempt, to the best of my abilities, prevention of anyone else from assisting with / going ahead with the launch, that I have any power/control on. Up to and including the extent of capping my comrades in the back of the head. For the love of all that’s sacred and holy, that’ exactly what anyone in the position should do if ever, God forbid, push came to shove. For when the order comes, it is clear these engines of annihilation have failed in their primary purpose
Removing the warheads from the missiles in the first place is not a viable alternative as it would surely implicate knowledge of it transpiring through the elaborate spy networks thus defeating the deterrent purpose of the installations.
Neither is actually instructing people not to launch when ordered, for the very same reasons.
However, one faced with the choice, and half decent human being should refrained from carrying out the launch. This should be self evident to any half decent human being and I’ll not take the time to argue through reason why this is so.
Dispatching further warheads would be but an exacerbation of the crime against humanity that will have begun yet may still be preventable as far as the magnitude of its final consequences are concerned if enough half decent human beings stop for a moment to ponder what abomination they’re about to commence/continue to horrid fruition.
…melodrama complete.
Yes, that tracked behemoth takes the manliness cake.
October 7th, 2006 at 12:53 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
*primary purpose of reciprocally deterring their use.
October 7th, 2006 at 12:59 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I view this moral dilemma as akin to the prisoner’s game conundrum.
October 7th, 2006 at 4:14 pm - IP Man-Hash: b79aed6d3efc2
smrtpants you write like you have down syndrome, but being a man (genius from birth) I managed to make out a fraction of what you said.
We men have these things called cocks, fueled by testosterone manufactured in the ballsack. These elements of our being make sex “fun”, something you wouldn’t understand. Which means sometimes we get caught up with fuckwits who don’t deserve our company just because they have a vagina.
And it’s funny how you try to act like we’re dating abusive women then you end your moronic rant by saying we have soft erections. Making your post worthless without anyone even having to shoot it apart.
October 7th, 2006 at 5:08 pm - IP Man-Hash: 0363c503d25ea
guns protect our country. i dont have a problem with them in that sense… but when it comes to killing innocent people. that is when i have a problem with them.
October 7th, 2006 at 7:03 pm - IP Man-Hash: eab4c21bb6be5
oil tankers provide energy for our country. i dont have a problem with them in that sense… but when it comes to oil spills. that is when i have a problem with them.
zomg! did i juss stait de obvee-us?
October 8th, 2006 at 10:47 am - IP Man-Hash: 2f2d948528fdf
so dont men and women overall feel the same about guns; they are good to a certain point?
October 8th, 2006 at 8:17 pm - IP Man-Hash: 7b7ac5fc27ee1
Sandra, shut the fuck up.
October 8th, 2006 at 8:32 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
@Sandra — “when it comes to killing innocent people… I have a problem with [guns]“. Yeah, that is honestly kind of asinine. But you seem to be trying to establish a dialog, so I’ll respond. Here is one time in life when cliches are mostly right. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
In one horrible area — school shootings — it appears guns leverage the horror. This imposes a genuine crisis of conscience. What if we had a lot more gun control laws?
Well, sadly, we have the answer: Canada. They have a buttload — a metric buttload to boot — of gun laws. And they’ve had school shooting after school shooting. (Go look on my blog at http://wolfe.mabtw.com for my coverage of the Montreal shootings if you want a complex in-depth analysis of this phenomenon). It turns out evil crazy gunmen manage to get guns by… evil crazy ways! They don’t just shop at Walmart and say “I’d like a gun good for killing lots of poor innocent girls because I’m a scumbag”.
Guns are a reality. Mostly, I think, a good one. Anyone who’s walked through western North America will appreciate that. Those from Europe or other parts; well, they’re entitled to their views. I particularly like the fact that the gun is a great equalizer — it makes it much tougher for a young girl to be raped. 100lb young woman with .357 chambered with .38? The 200lb rapist is going to think twice. Or thrice. And then not at all.
A woman jogging in the west? I’d recommend she consider a .45. Cougars probably won’t kill her.
I think men are better than women. But women are better than cougars. And evil school shooters are worse than pretty much everything.
-wolfe
October 8th, 2006 at 10:17 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Sandra, don’t listen to Wolfe. That very lined he paraphrased is classic NRA textbook drivel. Read this instead and be enlightened as to the truly gruesome nature of your insane gun culture and a society of prevalent and easily accessible firearms as well as other related matters such as the incredibly inane, were it not by design and purpose evil, legislation being pushed by NRA and cronies Inc. both state side and federal.
Oh, and don’t visit Florida unless you’ve got a very good reason, good enough to jeopardise your life for. And be quick about departing once having dealt with whatever matters you had to there.
Wolfe, sorry if I offended with this particular comment. But not really.
October 8th, 2006 at 10:25 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Yeah, you offended me, and you called my words ‘drivel’.
Given that my words are tautological, yeah, I’d say that’s offensive. I’ll let the rest of the men on this site judge your words and mine. I’ve got a reasonable degree of confidence in that judgment, so I shan’t bother attacking yours.
-wolfe
October 8th, 2006 at 10:29 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Shop at Walmart is EXACTLY what some of them did. Or used to procure them there. Until they found it economically inviable, or not preferable, to keep the shit up opting instead for goods sane to retail.
They also buy them at gun shows through newspaper ads, etc - all ANY background check free. Only when purchasing from federally licensed gun dealers do they need to pass a pathetically meagre .
Anyone can buy a gun in the US. From convicted rapists or pedophiles to mass murderers. Money ain’t got no colour nor smell. Ain’t that the truth for the gun lobby and their beloved industry?
Again, don’t listen to Wolfe. He means well. But is just sohohoho plain wrong and ain’t no way he’ll see the light. It’s what guns do to owners.
October 8th, 2006 at 10:30 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Well. Sorry you have to take offence. You know where I stand. I’m not going to deny it. Ever.
October 8th, 2006 at 10:37 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
How could I have reacted, you blatantly quoting NRA party line like that. Next you’ll tell me cars and guns are tantamount. Or won’t, because I’ve managed to, predictably, annoy you on the issue again.
Alas. If so it is to be.
October 10th, 2006 at 8:21 pm - IP Man-Hash: bd8fe0c80119e
Guns are tools nothing more and nothing less. Much like emotions, things which women have but cannot understand.
-Strength and Honor-
October 11th, 2006 at 12:08 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I do hope someone is smart/sane enough to blink over NKorea soon. And if history taught us anything, neither the US nor NK are.
Don’t get me wrong, those are stupid, insane, crazy muddafockers. But much of the US’s history of foreign policy does not do it proud either. In the least. Or at least it shouldn’t.
Someone needs to blink. And soon.
Neither the yanks nor the gooks’ stupid political agendas or simian leadership is worth a smiting nuke fest.
October 11th, 2006 at 12:09 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Oh God. Condolizza Rice. We’re dead.
October 11th, 2006 at 2:12 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Shorter Sony:
As we’ve discussed this is flatly false. You do partly redeem yourself (by rendering your language into a contradictory hash) with the next sentence
Exactly. Though even there you’re partly wrong. Many states have a variety of requirements for checks and registration of private sales.
People have a right to dispose of their private property, whether it’s at a gun show or at a kitchen table or via a newspaper. Closing the ‘gun show loophole’ means either eliminating all private firearms sales (and gifts, e.g. from a father to a son). It may also mean requiring federal registration for people who deal in books. (Most of the un-registered/no background check ’sales’ at gun shows that the anti-gun crowd rage about are in fact of books and the like, not firearms. If we take them at their word — and Sony has quoted them at this before — then they would require federal registration of book dealers).
Be honest: Do you seek to eliminate all private sales of firearms? Of books? Of knives? If so, then simply be honest and say so, though I think you’ll have a great deal of resistance to the idea.
As you also know, since I’ve mentioned it to you, according to the Department of Justice, only 0.7% of the handguns involved in crimes are acquired via gun shows, and the vast majority of those were legally acquired, complete with a background check.
So… in order to close the loophole of sales of items at gunshows by non-licensed dealers, we’d have to federally license (and register) book sales, knife and other souvenir sales, and abolish private sales of firearms.
Note that it is a crime to profit by private firearms sales without being a federally licensed dealer. The actual legal scope for selling a private firearm is impressively narrow, and you appear to be rather ignorant on this point.
And all this, which has you very excised, would impact perhaps 0.1% of the guns involved in crimes. A huge new bureaucracy, lots of new federal charges, being able to arrest book dealers who’ve never held a firearm in their lives… oh what fun for the totalitarians!
It simply makes no rational sense.
There are plenty of rational grounds for debating and discussing firearms regulation; this isn’t remotely one of them, unless your aims are propagandistic and totalitarian in nature. Perhaps they are, in which case be honest about it.
Same background check as is done in a gun store. If you think the background check is inadequate please explain exactly what additional information you’d like known. Here is the federal register on the matter. Please specify in detail what needs to be added, and why you wish that information added. Please provide evidence that this will actually increase safety rather than regulations.
In other words, provide some evidence that you’re not just suffering from raging hoplophobia and have actually rationally thought this through.
Bingo. Now substitute any other country in the world for “US” — even Japan, though it’s very tough there. None of the categories you specifically list can legally purchase a gun in the US, but all are able to do so — and are able to do so in Britain, Canada, Australia, dare I say it — Romania!
That’s the entire point. Black markets work. Money talks. Evil people will be able to buy guns, regardless of how tightly you batten down the legal hatches in an attempt to brutally repress freedom for the honest.
Not really. The ‘gun lobby’ has repeatedly called for sensible legislation (and enforcement of same) on guns. Mandatory 5 year federal sentence for using a gun to commit a crime, for example… in addition to any other state or federal sentence.
The level of ignorance you exhibit on this topic simply must be down to hoplophobia, since I find it hard to believe you’re otherwise that irrational.
Do not despair; there are treatments for this unfortunate psychological condition. Seek help — it is not too late!
This is sadly a form of animism. Like the idea that “guns kill, people don’t”, it’s a primitive belief that inanimate objects can hold spirits that affect humans.
I am unaffected (in the way that you think) by my guns. I am very cautious in their use, and I do not, as a rule, carry. When I do, I do so in full accordance with the law, which can be painfully and foolishly restrictive.
I know this; when I carry, I bend over backwards to be polite and never give offense. I always concealed carry, so that hoplophobes aren’t frightened. I don’t drink alcohol and try to avoid even coca-cola/coffee when I carry. I never carry into a private home without checking the owner’s preferences.
On the basis of many years observation, the same can be said of most legal firearms owners who concealed-carry. (though I’m unusual in avoiding even coffee/coca-cola).
In the Anglosphere (and France), history has repeatedly shown that an educated and armed society is a polite society with very low crime. I can’t speak for the rest of the world.
-wolfe
October 11th, 2006 at 3:09 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Perhaps that I am, in the end. A hoplophobe.
October 11th, 2006 at 3:14 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I doubt I could find help for it. Even if I sought it.
October 11th, 2006 at 4:01 pm - IP Man-Hash: 4ea5b60c84502
To quote Larry the Cable Guy: “Guns don’t kill people, husbands who come home early do……” :-)
- Oldone
October 12th, 2006 at 12:05 am - IP Man-Hash: 531b6b42d6131
Thats why we invented overtime! :))
-Strength and Honor-
October 12th, 2006 at 2:57 pm - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
Unlike, for example, Romania, who managed to join the Axis powers in 1941 and then the Allied powers in 1944.
A smart move. Lots of Americans in Europe then.
With guns.
-Big Al
October 12th, 2006 at 3:01 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I sense a quarrel brewing. TBC.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:39 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
@Al, great point. Here I’ll make some points. They may end the fire, or flame it up. (I made sure to get specific permission from Dick before I started responding in this thread, btw). This to Sony.
@Sony. Yeah, there’s a lot the US has to be ashamed of. Treatment of some of the indigenous peoples. Invasions south and north. Slavery (which we inherited). The Munroe Doctrine, taken as a “we can run Latin America as Banana Republics”.
All of those are indeed shameful.
We’re not quite as evil as the Canadians in exterminating the Beothuk. We’re not quite as evil as the British in Ireland, destroying education, forcing hedgemasters, and mass deportations to….
Australia. We’re not quite as bad as the worst that they treated their Abo population, though cumulatively we may be worse.
We’re not quite as duplicitous as Romania in changing sides, and simply going, down through the years, with whatever nearby great power had the sway.
Sony, America has made a ton of mistakes. The Trail of Tears. (Google that and read up on it if you haven’t. Makes anyone want to weep.)
The treatment of African slaves. The treatment of Tories in the Revolution. Complacency and a willingness to divide the world into spheres of influence with the evil Soviets.
Backing financially corrupt regimes in Vietnam and China. Backing a crapload of dubious dictators in South America.
I’ve got a pretty good historical understanding of the mistakes America has made. The evil she has committed. I can name evils you haven’t even seen let alone thought of. But.
I challenge anyone on this site to name that which I don’t know, and follow it up. I’ll either say “yes” or “no.” Instantly.
But please, please… show me any power on earth that has done more good than America, and less evil.
Show me.
Human beings are imperfect. Decidedly so.
God can draw us closer to perfection. Guns can allow us to achieve it.
And that’s my point. And, I think, Al’s. But I shan’t speak for the man.
-wolfe
October 12th, 2006 at 4:00 pm - IP Man-Hash: a5d80956a3e6c
With all due respect wolfe, why is it you only use the term ‘evil’ with regards to the mistakes that Canadians, British, Romanians or Australians make; whereas you call some of the acts committed by America merely a mistake? How can you claim that what these countries have done is evil and America not?
October 12th, 2006 at 4:06 pm - IP Man-Hash: a5d80956a3e6c
Sorry wolfe, I wrote that precipitously as I misread your comment… my bad.
I shouldn’t post when it is so late at night! That will teach me!
October 12th, 2006 at 5:48 pm - IP Man-Hash: 49c9ff889fded
Sounds about right.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:16 pm - IP Man-Hash: adc8bceab83e4
does NE1 here like Inuyasha?! well i do LOL!!!
October 12th, 2006 at 11:39 pm - IP Man-Hash: 7f0331adb6577
leave u whore
October 13th, 2006 at 12:36 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Thank you, Biff, for your informed opinion. I’m beyond negating this character trait of mine.
Big Al. At first I intended to reply earnestly and integrally to your comment. But for the need and want for expediency in dealing with this unsavoury statement of yours that contradict the way I habitually treat such blatantly egregious disrepute of things I cherish and believe in as well as my strong sentiment on the matter I am at a loss for words and doubt my ability to provide a satisfactory, to me, response.
Wolfe surely understands for he knows my attitude of argumenting my convictions either integrally or not at all with almost no regard for the dialectical method of debate (remember my converting heathens comment?; not that I wish to imply something or other by the reference).
Because I am reluctant to say all I feel would be appropriate as response but also reticent of working with half measures I choose instead not to attempt at all to properly answer your sting.
Suffice to say your opinion of the plight of Romania in the 20th century seems founded in ignorance, at least selective ignorance, and seemingly bellicose conceit as well. Inappropriate and inadequate retaliatory sarcasm for my supposed anti Americanism, perhaps? Though you’ve not outright allegde that of me.
Duplicity? Wolfe, reading l’étranger Galagher’s book, or whatever it was, does not qualify you in the least to opinionate judicatively as you do and at the depth at which you do on such fundamental matters of others’. Please remove that semi opaque prism you glance through and research further so as to avoid prematurely conceived opinions tantamount to bias.
Le combat pour la prospérité de ma nation et la défense d’elle n’était jamais faux et sera toujours sacrosanct.
C’est cette attitude ignorante et vaniteuse qui vous qualifie des étrangers dans le monde entier.
Évidemment, vous êtes un étranger aussi. Par excellence.
J’ai attendu plus de toi.
Regards.
October 13th, 2006 at 12:47 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
And no. I don’t think I can, Wolfe. You’re right in this. I just hope things aren’t changing for the worse. Recently, she does seem to long for alignment awfully.
October 13th, 2006 at 4:01 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
@Sony Yes, Al simplified (on the plight of Romania). Given the (ludicrous) simplifications you’ve made over the issue of guns in this very thread, you can hardly blame him.
@Sony, I’m a man so I consider myself qualified to comment on anything. And no, I don’t do so via the mere reading of a book.
And I honor that and the rest of your french. And no, (surprise!) I didn’t have to translate it via an internet engine. Yes, even I the odious American can speak French. (If you disbelieve me, I will cheerfully join you in an appropriately monitored IM conference where you type nothing but French and I respond in realtime. I will not type in French since my kbd and windows installation doesn’t support it and I’m simply not as good at expressing myself in it as I am in English. Would you like to chat in Gaelic as an alternative language?)
Romania is a country beloved and blessed by God. I’ve little more to say.
A bientot. (Note, the proper circumflex is not present as I use neither a translation service nor a French Keyboard.)
-wolfe
October 13th, 2006 at 4:51 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I don’t see how gun control is related to nationalism. Nor do I see my simplifications as ludicrous. That could be either my hoplophobia speaking or your exaggerating somwhat, or both.
Truly qualified, no. After having also read some books of authors native to Romania, so to at least compensate one bias with another. Duplicitary was an entirely inappropriate word. An American cannot possibly fathom what their nation being stripped away state by state can be like.
At least not from living memory. You must also account for the various leaderships that paraded, the various conflicting interests of the internal political factions.
I confidently contend that had the territorial, economic and demographic integrity of Romania never been jeopardised, the entire war would have come to pass without Romania so much as flinching towards one side or the other.
Unless the Canadians and the Mexicans should jointly crucade against the US with Chinese backing all of a sudden.
Thank you, but nay. It was enough of a stretch putting that little speech together, impressive though it might have been. Thankfully, my native tongue vocabulary being significantly etymologically related to French made the aesthetic difference in places.
And you seem to read more than I write. I’m curious where you got ‘odious’ from in there.
I’m afraid gaelic is out of the question.
Not surprising I regularly use a Romanian keyboard layout and less often a Greek one for the occasional math. symbols. I also used the German layout for a while not because I am at all proficient in German but because of repeated dealings with names like mister Üzun’s relating to Karl Heinz Dietrich GmbH but I don’t anymore because that business relationship ended not very long after I picked it up from where my father left off.
And the argument was pointless apriori via Big All’s comment coming under some obscure corrollary or other of Godwin’s law. The initial statement had to do with the possibility of the current nuclear crisis going awry where the Cuban one, whose historical repeat this one obviously is, just went away, eventually. By a hare’s breath, I might add. One that might not be granted us by the grace of God, this time.
Neither the simian, neither the obese zombie seem to heed whatever little history they know of. Either that, or they’ either both evil or plain insane.
Let the wiser one blink. Please.
October 13th, 2006 at 5:00 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Plus, you’ve got lots of land to spare. You wouldn’t miss it as dearly. The same cannot be said of most nations.
Regards.
October 13th, 2006 at 5:21 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
@Luka yeah you messed up in reading, /bonk you, but in fairness to you, I phrased that whole post clumsily. Heck I misspelled Monroe and I wrote in considerable haste. The idea is worth discussion somewhere, perhaps on my blog. Thanks for correcting yourself. Best, -w.
I’m not sure what to say in response to this. I suppose an ahistorical arrogant American could say this… but surely not someone in Europe? Simply look at the 20th century!
With the greatest of respect, that is a stunningly ahistorical statement. Look at our Civil War. Look at all we’ve been though as a country!
Shrug. You’re welcome to your views. Civil War veterans were alive in my parents’ time. That matters. And the powerful impact of the term “Yankee” remains today. The idea that all that has disappeared down the memory hole is stunningly arrogant.
This seems important to you, so I’m quoting it and responding. (Note that you often fail to do the same). Please see below for my response.
And that’s rather sad. You’re saying it’s all about your own nation, and not freedom. Fair enough.
Romania was in a hellish place. I’m not sure I buy your defense of her combined with your attacks. One or the other must logically buckle.
You cannot logically claim America is evil/wrong in a situation with limited choices and claim your country is perfect/good when faced with similar limited choices. The fact that America has more power doesn’t mean her choices are greater.
Impossible now. Could happen towards the middle of this century, but not if Chinese debts matter. Yes, that points to American weakness, but not American territorial weakness; quite the reverse, curiously.
You did well; I could not have done so without access to dictionaries or digital translation. I read French (and some other languages), and I can speak French (and no other languages), but I cannot say I am adept.
Cool beans. I lack. I use a plain-jane US keyboard since everything crashes slightly less.
I don’t know… it could be what you said about the US and its government? But maybe I’m just imagining things. I must be…
No, no, I don’t think that’s what he was about. His remarks were quite elegant and accurate, and little to do with Godwin’s Law.
Sure, ok. Well, if you really equate America to North Korea, morally, then there is no point continuing discussion. Can you please verify your views on this matter?
I’ll be the first to criticize my beloved nation when she’s wrong; I’ll be the first to defend her when she’s right.
Regards,
-wolfe