|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:50 AM | |||
| davinxtk | I can see 'needed to' in the context of bitchslapping Afghanistan, but everything that followed that is where the exaggeration becomes next to unnecessary. | ||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:46 AM | |||
| Zhukov |
I was going to explain it using a dialectic method, but I couldn't be bothered so I fessed up. Quote:
|
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:41 AM | |||
| davinxtk | And, in fact, either word fits the context but would give a completely different meaning to your sentence, each appropriate. | ||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:38 AM | |||
| davinxtk |
Quote:
|
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:33 AM | |||
| Zhukov |
I actually meant to say I was being a determinist about this. No edit. Yeah, I didn't think anyone would notice. :/ |
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:17 AM | |||
| Helm | I don't dissagree with your point, I'd just like to point out that the usage of the word 'dialectic' here seems a bit misplaced, really. Not that anyone else notices. | ||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:13 AM | |||
| Zhukov |
9/11 deserved to be a major part of history because it was one. I'm just being dialectical about this. You can argue that 3000 US citizens are as important as 3000 Sudanese citizens. It doesn't matter. Sudan isn't the major capitalist power of our time. |
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:02 AM | |||
| davinxtk |
Oh yeah, that must be it. That's exactly the problem. This place never runs out of two-bit smart-asses, does it? |
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 11:01 AM | |||
| El Blanco | I think its more of a case that you don't realize what you're saying. | ||
| Oct 6th, 2004 10:47 AM | |||
| davinxtk |
 I think you're both missing the point. Sure, it has had way more historical significance than it should have, but in terms of historical perspective, it really shouldn't have been as significant an event as it was. I'm not sure that I'm articulating my point very clearly here. |
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 10:03 AM | |||
| Zhukov |
It's pretty obvious that 9/11 has had more historic significance than alot of similar tragedies that you've never heard of. I'm actually agreeing with OOA here. |
||
| Oct 6th, 2004 05:49 AM | |||
| davinxtk | Haha, what? Because America's too good to endure terrorist attacks? Other countries worldwide have had to put up with this kind of shit for decades, some of which we even financed ourselves. The only horribly flawed perspective here is that which puts us above the rest of the world, porky. | ||
| Oct 5th, 2004 04:26 PM | |||
| The One and Only... |
You're only measuring historical significance in the number of lives the event took. What a horribly flawed perspective. |
||
| Oct 5th, 2004 02:42 AM | |||
| davinxtk |
Quote:
Whop. Three thousand people. There are six billion alive that we should be way more concerned about protecting, you dumb fuck. We've used three thousand dead to kill how many in Iraq and Afghanistan combined? I think we've quite well avenged our miniscule-in-influence (remember when I say this that America just ain't full of half the caliber of religious fanatics that the middle-east is) loss and then some. So yeah, three thousand dead Americans on 9/11 is officially something I don't give a shit about. I'm not trying to minimized the tragedy caused to any of the families involved, but seriously -- it's over. Life goes on. Quote:
|
||
| Oct 4th, 2004 10:37 AM | |||
| Anonymous |
Quote:
|
||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 10:29 PM | |||
| El Blanco |
Quote:
I certainly wasn't refering to the current presidential administration to the Thrid Reich. Nope, because I don't see that so full of hyperbole its almost insulting. |
||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 03:10 PM | |||
| Spectre X |
The best way to get rid of nuclear weapons would be to send them into a big body in space where they can't do jack shit anymore. I say Jupiter. Nobody's using it, and comets are ground up and reduced to dust in it. |
||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 02:38 PM | |||
| The One and Only... | I might suggest clicking the "More Info" button after the end of the video. | ||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 01:55 PM | |||
| Preechr | With our luck, we'd do that and hit some super aggressive alien species right in the planet and piss them off while letting em know we're ready for a fight... | ||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 03:24 AM | |||
| davinxtk | I'm all for pointing the world's nukes at some unsuspecting corner of the galaxy and saying "peace in the middle east" to the lot of them. We don't need that kind of destructive/contaminative power in the hands of ANYBODY, kossaks, chinks, sand ******s, and stupid white men alike. | ||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 02:41 AM | |||
| Zhukov |
Oh no, our tax dollars! BILL CLINTON KNEW WHAT'S WHAT! I seriously couldn't watch all of it, it was that disturbing. How is it intelligent? Is because they know what a mini nuke is? Load of 'Democrats will make it better' arse. And I'm all for DPRK for getting a nuclear weapon thankyou very much. |
||
| Oct 3rd, 2004 01:14 AM | |||
| Immortal Goat |
Here's a much better (and more informative) animation from the same site. Much more disturbing, intelligent, and well made. Yes, is is kinda disturbing to watch, but watch it all the way through. Your tax dollars at work |
||
| Oct 2nd, 2004 08:44 PM | |||
| davinxtk |
Quote:
I didn't and won't watch the video, but I do hope that someone telling other people to have historical perspective doesn't take 9/11 very seriously. |
||
| Oct 2nd, 2004 06:57 PM | |||
| El Blanco | And did Team Bush make the picture on top, or is there someone with phtotoshop and no historical perspective? | ||
| Oct 2nd, 2004 05:31 PM | |||
| Captain Goodtimes | It took you two months to come up with that yuk-yuk? | ||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |||
