Things That Changed The WORLD!
said on May 22, 2010 at 03:17 PM

me niether

  • warman45
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 22, 2009
  • posts: 288
said on May 24, 2010 at 12:11 PM

cavetroll1304 said

thegeniusmartin said

Hmmm, I see that one more is banned!

I don't see anyone new who is banned

Not new :P but another one, I just started to write here again man ... havent been active latley! I mean Tjelas.

_________________
"Idea becomes real" - Nordic Battle Groups motto

"A mans success isn't based on how high he can reach at the top ... only how high he bounces up when he have hit the bottom" - General G.S Patton
said on May 24, 2010 at 10:04 PM

Oh man, he was banned a while back, apparently an alt of Maky (which I honestly have a hard time believing)

_________________
"I am not your son"
~JPS
said on May 25, 2010 at 01:16 AM

FINALLY! the dutch deflector shield is online! muhamuhamuhamuha!

  • warman45
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 22, 2009
  • posts: 288
said on May 25, 2010 at 01:53 AM

...

TGM is Sweedish...

_________________
"I am not your son"
~JPS
said on May 25, 2010 at 02:19 AM

i was actually attempting to get this thread back on topic... way to go insert eye rolling smiley here

  • warman45
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 22, 2009
  • posts: 288
said on May 27, 2010 at 03:43 PM

What? I hear something about dutch..?!

Wassup?

_________________
'If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much!'
  • Dutchie
  • location: Netherlands
  • joined: Aug 10, 2009
  • posts: 400
said on May 29, 2010 at 03:23 AM

Denmark?

_________________
"Mors ultima linea rerum est mortalis."
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 12:01 AM

cavetroll1304 said

Dutchie said

cavetroll1304 said

It's hard to say something "changed" the world because that's relying on the thought that the world was destined to go one single path, a ludicrous statement in my humble opinion. That being said I think this was one of biggest things to happen in the world:

America declaring independence from England

Things that changed the WORLD. I mean, what did this mean for Luxembourg? Not much really.

You do realize America has the only nation to break away from their mother country, survive a civil war, and still come out with the same government right? America has changed plenty of things, what if America hadn't joined in WWII? I doubt you could make the Luxembourg comment contemplating that enough. Henry Ford revolutionized the automobile industry, he was American, just one American I chose to name as an example.

America is a beacon of freedom, at its founding it was the only free country from a rule of monarchy. America was the nation in which the atomic bomb was created, as said earlier the atomic weapons changed the world.

Plus, the American revolution is what inspired the French to have their revolution (although that one didn't end well), so if you wanted an international cause and effect, there you go.

DUDE I have studied the French revolution and the only inspiration the Frogs got from you lot was the Human rights, otherwise pure Frenchness.....America was not the only country free of rule from monarchy at its founding, Netherlands were and Rome a long time before that, and Greece. The atomic bomb was invented by a German who moved to America before the war. If America had not joined in WW2 USSR would have seized the whole of Europe, and we would all be speaking Russian instead of English. America is not the "beacon of freedom" as it had freedom of speech after Britain, and any country in which race makes significant effects on how your healthcare is handled cannot be a beacon of freedom: Child mortality rates for African American children are twice that of those for White children, with Latino babies having a child mortality rate 4 times that of white children. And I'm not even mentioning the whole situation before Martin Luther King Jr. and the whole slave thing etc... no country has a valid claim to beacon of freedom as if you look at country from a fair point of view basically everyone is a huge ass. And btw you remember that recession we had recently, thanks for that one Americans. Btw I have an American passport, I'm just being impartial.

_________________
In order to know how to use free will, we must first know how to fight for it.
  • beast566
  • MHII
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: May 29, 2010
  • posts: 600
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 02:08 PM

beast566 said

DUDE I have studied the French revolution and the only inspiration the Frogs got from you lot was the Human rights, otherwise pure Frenchness

"DUDE," I have too, the beliefs of the Rights of Man as practiced through America is what got the French thinking their way, pissing the people off even more at the Upper classes and then... you know what comes next.

.....America was not the only country free of rule from monarchy at its founding, Netherlands were and Rome a long time before that, and Greece.

Please tell me when during the ancient times there were many monarchies constantly taking land all around them. Greece and Rome were in areas where they could easily thrive from trade to become the only powerhouses. At the time of their founding, there weren't any monarchies around at the time. Holland fought for over 80 years in their war for independence, hardly free from a monarchy at it's founding if you ask me. You miss my main point that we have been free from the beginning

The atomic bomb was invented by a German who moved to America before the war. If America had not joined in WW2 USSR would have seized the whole of Europe, and we would all be speaking Russian instead of English.

Your point is...?

America is not the "beacon of freedom" as it had freedom of speech after Britain,

Then why did Thomas Paine originally write Common Sense under a pen name? The British had to force their king to sign the Magna Carta for rights, America put them into the constitution from the beginning.

and any country in which race makes significant effects on how your healthcare is handled cannot be a beacon of freedom: Child mortality rates for African American children are twice that of those for White children, with Latino babies having a child mortality rate 4 times that of white children.

Since when do death rates constitute how much freedom a country has?

And I'm not even mentioning the whole situation before Martin Luther King Jr. and the whole slave thing etc... no country has a valid claim to beacon of freedom as if you look at country from a fair point of view basically everyone is a huge ass.

Bullcrap.

And btw you remember that recession we had recently, thanks for that one Americans. Btw I have an American passport, I'm just being impartial.

No you're not, you are blaming all Americans for it, there is no way an impartial person would blame everyone for a problem caused by a few.

_________________
"I am not your son"
~JPS
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 06:09 PM

sorry cavetroll got a bit worked up at the end of that, It was more the Bank's fault than American people.

The French Revolution had absolute zip to do with gaining freedom in the first place, it is a common misconception that enlightenment thinking or want of freedom was the actual reason for the revolution in the first place, it was in fact because the country's economy was in such a bad state of affairs, because the king Louis XVI was not able to run an outdated structure, that France was basically bankrupt, add to this the failed reforms of the chancellor-generals during the 1780s and a couple of bad harvests along with the great fear and you get the Estates-General in 1789. The three estates, ecclesiastical, Nobles and everyone else had one vote each. The third estate wanted voting by head and more votes, they were only given more votes, so they basically had the same number of votes anyway. This angered them and they started having separate meetings until the king would listen to their demands, eventually most of the ecclesiastical estate joined the third estate as they were mainly poor parish priests. This pressured the king into calling a royal assembly, but the third estate were not told the main hall would be being prepared, so when the doors were locked they were angry and had to call for an emergency meeting, leading to the tennis court oath, and the forming of the national assembly. Things led on from there, with rioting in Paris, the storming of the Bastille and eventually in October a group of women dragged the King to Paris because he was never there and people felt he neglected them. Then peasants took up arms against their lords demanding the abolition of feudalism. Never once was freedom or popular vote mentioned until lawyers and the middle classes seized control of the country. And that is a simplified explanation.

America was isolated at its founding, and the Brits were basically a democracy, they were as they are now. In the beginning you were ruled by Britain....

and any country in which race makes significant effects on how your healthcare is handled cannot be a beacon of freedom: Child mortality rates for African American children are twice that of those for White children, with Latino babies having a child mortality rate 4 times that of white children.

Since when do death rates constitute how much freedom a country has?

And I'm not even mentioning the whole situation before Martin Luther King Jr. and the whole slave thing etc... no country has a valid claim to beacon of freedom as if you look at country from a fair point of view basically everyone is a huge ass.

Bullcrap.

I am more mentioning that race should not make a difference in a country that is the "beacon of freedom". Also if blacks being treated as second rate citizens and black slavery is "bullcrap" to you, that obviously says something about you?

Dude yeah America has loads of great things about it, I mean cars are cool and so is electricity, but no country is perfect, or a "beacon of freedom"

btw I forgot about Guatamala Bay

_________________
In order to know how to use free will, we must first know how to fight for it.
  • beast566
  • MHII
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: May 29, 2010
  • posts: 600
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 06:50 PM

beast566 said sorry cavetroll got a bit worked up at the end of that, It was more the Bank's fault than American people.

I can't agree with that. "A country has the government that its citizens deserves." It's the one they deserve because it's the one in place and The People leave it there. If the Government is corrupt (as is our US government, the large majority of sitting politicians having been bought and paid for by lobbyists) it is The People's responsibility to toss the bums out of office -- which hasn't happened. Ergo, it is The People that are ultimately responsible for the Evil that their government does -- or does NOT do.

I harped on about the Government because it is the Government that A) chose to not enforce legislation that had been keeping a leash on Big Business (banks included), B) rescinded legislation that had been regulating Big Business, and C) enacted legislation that enabled Big Business to where it could REALLY screw over We The People. (In particular, all of the "Corporate personhood" nonsense).

After the Great Depression, having been seriously burned by the bankers' wanton behavior, there was a whole raft of laws enacted to make sure the cycle didn't repeat. But starting with Reagan, those laws were eroded and repealed until banks once again had free rein to do pretty much whatever they wanted...which they did. And surprise! It's 1929 all over again.

We The People did this to ourselves, because We The People are too complacent and not willing to do whatever needs to be done to seriously overhaul our own government and make it serve us instead of the Corporations that are buying "our" elected representatives out from under us.

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 07:13 PM

I wouldn't class America as a democracy when you can only vote for two parties. Or can you vote for other ones?

_________________
I tore a path screaming through wind and blood, I will it all, burning deep, in my, skull
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 07:27 PM

Technically it's a "democratic republic". A pure democracy is EVERYBODY being allowed to vote on EVERY issue. Rather unwieldy, that. So instead we elect representatives who in turn make all those decisions.

Technically, our choices are not limited to just two parties. There's also about a dozen MUCH smaller parties. Practically, ours is a two-party system because without the support of one of the two major parties, a candidate's chances of getting elected is somewhere between "slim" and "none". Still a small number of independent candidates make it into office (but not enough to shake things up). However, the chances of a non-Republican/no-Democrat winning the Presidential race is somewhat less than "microscopic".

In Reality though, there no real difference between the Republicans and the Democrats: the overwhelming majority of elected officials are actually owned by Big Business. (Which now, because of a recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision, may spend an unlimited amount on any and all political campaigns.) [We The People are soooooo screwed.]

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 07:30 PM

CaptainPatch said

Technically it's a "democratic republic". A pure democracy is EVERYBODY being allowed to vote on EVERY issue. Rather unwieldy, that. So instead we elect representatives who in turn make all those decisions.

Technically, our choices are not limited to just two parties. There's also about a dozen MUCH smaller parties. Practically, ours is a two-party system because without the support of one of the two major parties, a candidate's chances of getting elected is somewhere between "slim" and "none". Still a small number of independent candidates make it into office (but not enough to shake things up). However, the chances of a non-Republican/no-Democrat winning the Presidential race is somewhat less than "microscopic".

In Reality though, there no real difference between the Republicans and the Democrats: the overwhelming majority of elected officials are actually owned by Big Business. (Which now, because of a recent 5-4 Supreme Court decision, may spend an unlimited amount on any and all political campaigns.) [We The People are soooooo screwed.]

Ah I see :P. We have 3 major parties and a good amount of medium sized parties like the green party and plenty of small ones like the Monster Raving Loony Party (I didn't make them up xD)

Randomly every time you say We The People I get the Mudvayne song We The People in my head lmao

_________________
I tore a path screaming through wind and blood, I will it all, burning deep, in my, skull
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 09:52 PM

ian241289 said Randomly every time you say We The People I get the Mudvayne song We The People in my head lmao

LOL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG-XpeVBcto (Be sure to open the drop page to read the lyrics!)

So true. I frequently mention "the tyranny of the 51%" when describing democracy. But since only about 60% (at most) eligible voters even bother, it's actually closer to "the tyranny of of the 31%".

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 09:57 PM

warman45 said

i was actually attempting to get this thread back on topic... way to go insert eye rolling smiley here

1) the creation of language

2) the creation of writing

3) the invention of currency

4) the development of a codified Scientific Method

5) the Printing Press (just as an accelerator)

6) the atomic bomb (nobody wins)

_________________
"Until you know what is worth dying for, Life isn't worth living."

"Choose wisely"
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 10:20 PM

CaptainPatch said

ian241289 said Randomly every time you say We The People I get the Mudvayne song We The People in my head lmao

LOL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG-XpeVBcto (Be sure to open the drop page to read the lyrics!)

So true. I frequently mention "the tyranny of the 51%" when describing democracy. But since only about 60% (at most) eligible voters even bother, it's actually closer to "the tyranny of of the 31%".

I already know the lyrics through listening to that album to death xD

_________________
I tore a path screaming through wind and blood, I will it all, burning deep, in my, skull
said on Jun 08, 2010 at 11:35 PM

Maps

Computers

TV

Phones

Guns

Iron, steel, bronze, stones, fire, tools, armour, wood, houses

extinction of the dodo ;)

_________________
In order to know how to use free will, we must first know how to fight for it.
  • beast566
  • MHII
  • location: United Kingdom
  • joined: May 29, 2010
  • posts: 600
said on Jun 09, 2010 at 12:19 AM

beast566 said

America was isolated at its founding, and the Brits were basically a democracy, they were as they are now. In the beginning you were ruled by Britain....

We still broke free and remain free today, never been conquered by a foreign power yet, and I pray that we never are.

and any country in which race makes significant effects on how your healthcare is handled cannot be a beacon of freedom: Child mortality rates for African American children are twice that of those for White children, with Latino babies having a child mortality rate 4 times that of white children.

Since when do death rates constitute how much freedom a country has?

And I'm not even mentioning the whole situation before Martin Luther King Jr. and the whole slave thing etc... no country has a valid claim to beacon of freedom as if you look at country from a fair point of view basically everyone is a huge ass.

Bullcrap.

I am more mentioning that race should not make a difference in a country that is the "beacon of freedom". Also if blacks being treated as second rate citizens and black slavery is "bullcrap" to you, that obviously says something about you?

I was saying bullcrap to that every country "is a huge ass." No where in your original post did you mention anything about second rate citizens, you just mentioned Martin Luther King Jr. and I had no idea what you were trying to put forth with it. Obviously the treatment of blacks during the 1960s was terrible, I think we can all agree on that. Does the same type of racism happen today, only in extremely isolated incidents, when I look at a black person, all I see is a person, nothing more, nothing less, the same with whites, hispanics, etc.

_________________
"I am not your son"
~JPS