Dr.Worthless

Here comes the uber arguement about gay marriage. For the record, I'm torn between religious beliefs, and civil beliefs. I recognize that I shouldn't have a right to tell people who the can marry, but I also believe that same sex couples are wrong. Soddomy and Oral Sex is illegal in many states also, in some states any sex other than vaginal is illegal, so unless the gays want to jerk eachother off, they're breaking the law. Please provide substancial proof that people are born with sexual orientation. A simple arguement against that statement would be that every species on this earth is born with the instinct to procreate. This is obviously to ensure the survival of the species. So, why would humans be born with the preference of wanting to have sex with something that it cannot pro-create with? Since same sex couples cannot pro-create, that would be going against the laws of self preservation. Get off your high horse, -*BAD WORD*-er. If someone wants to live by the commands of the church, and the Pope, that is their right. It does not make them below your "educated" self. That whole paragraph is shot by simply stating that Tenet was appointed by Clinton, during his administration. You're right.. the president appoints people to run the CIA and other departments because he doesnt have the time to run them himself. Since you obviously think you're so -*BAD WORD*-ing smart, why dont you go into detail for us?

I won't really take the time to post on this thread, I just wanted to say that Vile, next time you want to write up trash like that, please back up your claims with sitations. I found it rather amusing that you start the post by bashing Fox News regurgitators, then proceded to post a left wing news organization regurgitation. Sorry, if it goes against church law the pope has full power to tell the member to go screw himself. The pope is the leader of the catholic church, right? Please don't tell me that being a member of the Catholic church is now a civil right, regardless of beliefs.

BEST -*BAD WORD*- line i've read on these forums since I joined. Worthless. (Who breaks the law everytime he drinks a beer.)

ROFL, so let me take a second to understand what you're trying to say. You would consider it a stretch to put Bin Laden and Saddam under the same catagory? We all know about Bin Laden, and Saddam openly supported terrorist suicide bombers, not to mention all the humanitarian offenses against him. Really the core of the problem here is some people not viewing Saddam as a threat. Weapons or no weapons (at the time of invasion), I personally feel much better without the maniac in power. Share my opinion or not, make positive that if given the chance, Saddam would have ham-stringed the -*BAD WORD*- out of the US, doing whatever he could. Yeah I bet, Again.. Why in gods name would a man that has proven, in the past, not to give a flying -*BAD WORD*- about UN resolutions, care about one that had him destroy weapons? I'm done with the thread, Its just goin in circles. You're obviously convinced Saddam was absolutly no threat to the US, or the world, so in your opinion he should still be in power. (If your opinion is different please correct me.)

Amen, Amen, AMEN!!. Just like he said above, we supported the UN for years, when it came to a point where the UN would do nothing but continually say "You better not Saddam!", something had to be done. The million dollar question. Some could still be hidden in Iraq under 100 feet of sand. There was plenty of time to ship them out of the country. -*BAD WORD*-, mabye he even made a last-minute-deal with some folks, and traded military forces for weapons? Who knows. Just because we haven't found anything does not mean they do not exist. Sorry, I still don't see how anyone can make the arguement that the world is more dangerious without Saddam as a leader. Removing a sadistic tyrant with a known itch to invade other countries maliciously surely was the complete wrong thing to do, it only makes things more dangerous!! BTW, Newsflash. When we capture Osama, guess what, there will be terrorist retaliations for that too. So when those occure, will you say the same thing? "Man, Capturing Osama was the worst thing we could have done, It's made the world more dangerous!!"

So wait, you're telling me that Saddam, who invaded kuwait, who openly supported suicide bombers, who activly participated in genocide, who terrorized his own citizens, (must the list go on?) decided to listen to the UN and destroy the weapons. Heh, I bet. Well, With further consideration I guess UN laws are really effective and no doubt would have stopped Saddam from doing anything in the future, and surely caused him to destroy all weapons he had. Laws always work, just consider how well making suicide illegal worked, oh and lets not forget outlawing sodomy. The weapons inspectors were constantly being given the run-around. Blix on multiple occasions was only allowed to inspect sites when Saddam allowed him to. He was also denied access to sites multiple times. Add "The French and Germans would be getting $$ for the arms dealings/who knows what else that they were engaged in." Saddam Clicky Action. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power" So, lets cut the number at 360. Taking the low number, leaving Saddam in power would have cost about another 25,200 iraqi lives, the high end is of the tune of 45000. What I want to know is, how did the US become the evil here? -*BAD WORD*-O PEOPLE, read the numbers, have you forgotten the sick -*BAD WORD*- Saddam did while he was in power? 25,200 - 45000 > 10,000. KThx, stop trying to make the civilian casualities of this war into some huge attrocity. While every civilian casualty is a tragedy, guess what, SADDAM DID THIS -*BAD WORD*- FOR A DECADE +. But then again I guess all the liberals were right, Iraq was clearly a much better place before the invasion than it currently is, and for Christ sakes who gives a -*BAD WORD*- about the average Iraq jo, our gas prices are higher because of this!! Give me a break.

Was wrong about what, WMD's? I thought I had just read that we sold them to Iraq in the years previous. What happened to the ones we sold them? Oh yeah, Saddam probably followed the UN command to destroy them, we all know Saddam always followed UN laws.

Well, the situation faced by the military is a curious one. Every civilian casuality is one to many, but if we can drop a bomb on a suspected terrorist controlled building instead of sending troops in on the ground to clear it, Im all for it. Yes, this is shallow, but If I was to write out my full opinion it would be a novel, and I've got other -*BAD WORD*- to to right now, mabye later =) If you gave me the gun with the knowledge that I was going to use it to commit a crime, you were a part of it. If you provided me the gun without knowledge that I was going to be bad with it, then you werent. If you want to try to make the arguement that gas was provided to Saddam when the US knew it would be used to gas kurds, good luck. I'll find estimates if you want, but m!@#$%^&* graves are found all the time with bodies in the 1000's. I guess we will be? Hopefully a administration will come into office that'll cut out all the wasteful spending, corporate welfare, and all the other -*BAD WORD*- that goes on in politics. That would take care of the deficit easily. What we're really facing here is that something has to be done about terrorism. Invading iraq may or may not have been the right move, but its a move. A move thats alot better than just dealing with it, which is whats been happening prior to 9/11.

Same Style as before, replying to them as I read them A requirement for participating in discussion is reading what people say, Ancient. If you'll reread my statement, I noted that Polix was actually at fault for placing blame on bush. The rest of the statement is credible, how do you propose we change things? Direct intervention from congress isn't going to happen, big business runs their pocket books. Without Congress, the President is powerless. We're all en!@#$%^&*les to our opinions. However wrong they may be Please, if you cant comment without insulting its not worth commenting. Don't make me list all the issues Kerry has flip-flopped about, It would take over 2-3 pages to list, and tests have shown that you cant keep a monkeys interest for more than a few paragraphs. (One insult deserves another, and yes that was horridly hypocritical) Safer is safer is safer. One interesting point I would like to raise in the above statement, if Saddam truely had no ties to terrorism, why would terrorism increase when we removed him from power? Why would terrorists give a flying -*BAD WORD*- about us attacking Saddam if they had no ties with him. You would figure they would be happy we're attacking poor dangerless Saddam, and not focusing on them. The past dictates the present. You have much to learn young jedi. Explaining that outsourcing is the result of the nature of capitalism, and praising it are 2 different things. I won't be reading any of the links, because the bottom line is you, nor anyone else, has any solid evidence that Bush rigged any election. Saying that he did (without solid evidence to back the claim up) is called slander. I can agree with the fact that our past dealings with Saddam, were very shady. What I do not agree with is "responsibility for their death because of betrayal." Sorry, If Saddam g!@#$%^&*ed them, Saddam is the only one who's responsible. What the -*BAD WORD*- ever happened to accusing the people who actually commited the crime? This reminds me of the "It wasnt the terrorists fault that they flew planes into the world trade center, it was the Americans fault for being so evil.. our evilness forced them to do it." Rofl, give me a break. I was still -*BAD WORD*-ting my pants when America had dealings with Iraq, so sorry I don't remember. "Believing" Iraq wasn't a threat does not equal that they were not. I believing makes things true, then by god I better start believing in my dreams of becoming a billionaire and a pornstar. I won't touch that, it'll throw this thread way way way off topic. Let me just say though, that in faireness if you post how mean and evil America/Britain is. Please also include articles/pictures of the m!@#$%^&* graves and other attrocities performed by Saddam. No, I'm not legitimizing whats in the link, I'm just trying to keep things fair. Sorry, the correct answer would be "You're right Worthless, the current times, while rough, don't hold a candle to what Americans experienced during the Great Depression. I shouldn't have even compaired the two." You lose. You're welcome to play again though =) True enough.

Holy mother of jesus, I am going to make so many people sound rediculous with this post that I'm *almost* ashamed to post it. (GET READY FOR A NOVEL) Ok, I'm posting replies/links as I read posts. Suspected can be replaced with "-*BAD WORD*- rumor that liberals like to start". Seriously dude, you believe they rigged a vote? That was 4 years ago, move on. All the African Americans that were denied their vote were ex-felons that DID NOT FOLLOW THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS AND RE-REGISTER AFTER BEING RELEASED FROM PRISON. They were on a list of convicted felons, thus their voting right revoked. Even if something fishy was going on (which we will truely never know, IT WAS 4 YEARS AGO) I sure as -*BAD WORD*- dont want a convicted felon voting for who's going to run my country. G!@#$%^&*ed Kurds There's your proof that he had "WMD's". Piles of kurdish corpses is kinda a hard thing to ignore. Yes, people claim that his capability to produce wmd's was diminished after the first gulf war. Guess what folks, WE NEVER WENT INTO BAGHDAD. Nothing kept him from stashing away weapons, and/or moving them when he knew american invasion was eminent. Remember all the grief Hans got, Saddam not allowing him into palaces until HE was ready for him to go there. Yeah, Ok. Yep, War costs money. If you're concerned about the cost, please write whatever government officials you have in Canada and urge them to pledge support to the United States. I love how liberals throw this around like it is serious ammunition. I'm also appaled that you bought this. Having been old enough to listen to some of the stories that my grandfather had to tell about the Great Depression (He was born in 1922) his family had no money for food, and they lived off what his father could hunt. Sorry, don't compare whats going on now to what went on during the great depression, it's an insult to my dead grandfather, and an insult to all the citizens of the United States that made it through that time and kept the nation intact. Wow, it just so happens this is an issue your poster boy Kerry has flip flopped on, lets look shall we? Kerry Gay Marriage Flip Flop Some interesting points in that article. n 1996, a less compromising Kerry gave an imp!@#$%^&*ioned 10-minute speech on the Senate floor against an effort in Congress to define marriage only as a union between a man and a woman: Thats right, in 96 he was against the idea. Now out of convinence he's changed his mind. (Wow, that seems to be a re-occuring thing.) Time to move on to the next supportless post. ROFL, and You claim that Bush is to blaim for the outsourcing. Outsourcing occurs because developing countries are close to 20 years behind the United States in terms of pay scale. So they can pay workers there pennies on the dollar. A computer engineer in India works for 20-30k a year. Here in the US they work for 100-120k a year. So you're trying to sell me on the fact that Bush is at fault for PEOPLE IN INDIA WORKING FOR LESS MONEY??. Yeah ok, rofl. If ANYONE is at fault (which no one is, this is called "how capitalism works") It would be the economy the clinton administration fostered, that is a fake one based on .com business that had no real $$. Yep, when all that went bust we called that the "Tech bubble burst". I just noticed Polix blamed it on Bush, none the less shame on you both. Oh my god you have no clue what our military will look like if Kerry gets the election. Here's a list of just SOME of his voting record pertaining to the military. In 1991 Kerry voted to cut defense spending by 2 percent. Only 21 other senators voted with Kerry, and the defense cut was defeated. In 1991, Kerry voted to cut over $3 billion from defense and shift the funds to social programs. Only 27 senators joined Kerry in voting for the defense cut. In 1992, Kerry voted to cut $6 billion from defense. Republicans and Democrats alike successfully blocked this attempt to cut defense spending. In 1993, Kerry voted against increased defense spending for a military pay raise. Full Kerry Military Voting Record Livewire is next on the list. OF COURSE THERE ARE MORE TERRORIST ATTACKS. Holy -*BAD WORD*- out of all the propoganda I hear from the left, this is the most appauling. What do you expect terrorist to do about a nation that flat out says "we're coming for you". Do you expect them to say "oh gosh golly darn, the USA is after us I guess we just better give up". WAKE UP PEOPLE. These terrorist hate everything about us, they are out to kill our nation, our ideologies, us, our dogs, EVERYTHING ABOUT US. They will not go silently and wait for their demise, rest !@#$%^&*ured they will be fighting us tooth and nail. Not another economy based on outragious wages and fake security! No seriously, it was just bad luck that all those .coms went under and everyone has lost their jobs. Its just a fluke that all those folks that got hired at 100k+ salaries during the 90's are losing their jobs to qualified indians/chinese that will work for 1/3 of that. Oh wait sorry I forgot, thats bush's fault. Hey, I wish I could just slander people. LiveWire came on this board to malisiously ruin President Bush's name by claiming to know his intentions for the presidency. LiveWire registered on these forums having decided to hack into the server hosting it, and carry out malicious attacks on its users. (He really doesn't have this intention (that I know of) I'm just making a point). Your other posts are well articulated and mostly on base, so i'll give you credit for those. Please supress the propoganda machine from rearing its ugly head. NOW FOR MY OPINIONS, YES!!!!!!!!! I'd vote for Kerry if not for these reasons. 1.) Long history of anti-military voting. In the situatoin we have right now, the last thing we need is an anti-war activist in his actions and his voting history running the country. 2.) The dude wore flip-flops in the 60's and he's still flip-flopping 40 years later. Seriously, this dude flips and flops more than fishes out of water. 3.) He talks the talk, but when it gets down to it he will be just as catering to big business as our current president has. He has a -*BAD WORD*- special interest group for a wife, for christ sakes. I'm voting for Bush for these reasons. 1.) WMD's or no WMD's, the world is a safer place without Saddam. Anyone opposed to that statement supports rape, pillage, suppression, genocide, etc. 2.) What we're seeing right now on the economic front is a natural equilibrium. The 90's was defined by extravagant wages to fit the extravagant dreams that all the IT companies were built on. When everyone found out that the foundation of these companies were just that, dreams, the whole -*BAD WORD*- thing fell through. People are going to have to get used to working for a salary under 100k. Those salaries were rarely seen before the IT explosion. 3.) Neither candidate will stop outsourcing. Outsourcing is the result of a globalized economy, and the nature of capitalism. 4.) The US is in a recovery. Reasons I'm tempted to never vote again, and move to Australia. 1.) Both parties are in the pockets of big business. As someone mentioned before, the real power is held in congress. Big business has congress in their pockets, as a result big business writes the rule book. A sociology professor I had made an excellent analogy. Lets play a game of monopoly. Corporations start out with $5000, boardwalk, parkplace, all the green and yellow properties, and the rulebook. Average Joe Blow starts out with 500 bucks. Poverty man starts out with 50 bucks. Who do you think is gonna win the game of monopoly? 2.) I've never seen such a huge push for power in my whole life. It seems like EVERY -*BAD WORD*- STATION I TURN TO HAS SOME LIBERAL PROPOGANDA MACHINE PREACHING TO THE massES ON HOW BUSH IS TO BLAME FOR EVERYTHING. Seriously, I'm getting sick of it. Sad thing is 95% of the citizens of the United states would eat a dried up cat turd if you told them it was a milky way bar, and like it. There's the end of my novel, hoped you enjoyed the read.

Funny that no where in there did I read a response to lol.

1.) because I can 2.) I only type out long responses in message boards when I'm drunk. 3.) I have a PhD in worthless. Yep

The comment was in response to "absolute truths", not plato's political opinions. Wowza

OMG, Plato would so kick your -*BAD WORD*- if he was still alive. Worthless

I do believe its illegal, whats the difference in being selective in the scholarship based on skin color, and being selective on who you will serve in resteraunts, based on color. Worthless

Ok, Watching the whole trailer I know see the thing in question, my appologies. In the shortened version I saw on television, they showed the president talking about the terrorist, then cut to him saying "watch this drive" and him hitting the ball. Watching the whole trailer it was seemless and the camera just panned out, yadda yadda. You're right, it wasn't edited, my applogies. After watching the trailer, I might just go see it. I enjoy viewpoints from both sides of the coin. As I mentioned before, there is for sure more to the story than we know, there always has been and always will be. Some comments in the trailer are sort of questionable, If you take everything the president says with its literal meaning then you're a darn fool. An example in the trailer is his "you are the have and have mores.. some people consider you the privledged, i consider you my base." I took it as the president being jovial, Obviously moore and the leftists took it literally. Case in point.. at the whatever convention they held in atlanta (or some southern state.. my -*BAD WORD*-in mind cant remember yesterday, not to mention a few weeks ago) the president made a comment to a reporter "Sorry I can't field your questions, I leave here in a few hours, but I have to live with these other people everyday" Literal Intepretation "OMG THE BUSH PRESIDENCY IS LETTING REPORTERS LIVE IN THE WHITEHOUSE TO FUEL HIS PROPGANDA MACHINE AAGHGHGHAGHASDHGAHSDG" Actual Interpretation = jovial remark about the reporters. I know all of this falls on deaf ears. To many people believe Bush is the anti-christ and every problem in the world is his fault.. Worthless.

Ever heard of editing? I won't be going to see the movie, well I *might*. It is beneficial for the american public to realize there is ALWAYS more to the story than what we are told. What I do not believe the movie will accomplish is telling us this information in a non-biased fashion. Moore has made it apparent he doesn't like the current president, and im certain this movie will be so full of left wing spin that I'll get motion-sickness from watching it. I'll be awefully suprised if the movie is even all that good. It got a standing ovation a the (whatever) film festival, but that festival was filled with people that would have given a standing ovation to a 10 second film of a dog taking a -*BAD WORD*- as long as it ended with "Bush SUCKS!!!" flashing across the screen. Worthless

Affirmitive action was a good thing when it was implimented, now its a tool for reverse descrimination. Please, let me give you an example that has happened to me. I'm a White Male and live in Arkansas. I attend the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, and other than federal Pell Grant, I pay for college through working and student loans (my mother makes 15,000 a year, the school tuition is 3500 a semester). I didn't qualify for any scholarship help through the school, my ACT score of 30 was above the requirement of a score of 27 to qualify for consideration for recieving a scholarship, where I lacked was having above a 3.75 Highschool GPA, I had a 3.65. When looking for scholarships offered outside from the University, I found many blanket scholarships for students of ethnic background, IE any color except white. Last year the University recieved a good amount of money from the Walton Family (30 million dollars) and some of the money was to be made to setup a new scholarship program. Hoping to find some help I looked into the requirements for the scholarship, and here's what I found. Highschool GPA of 3.00 and College GPA above 2.75 if applicable ACT score of 25 or above Family in financial need African Americans only. So, what you can see here is the University offering a scholarship that has requirements well below the normal scholarship requirement, and the money is for African Americans only. Sorry, What we have here is reverse descrimination. In the above example (which really happened to me), because I'm a White Male, I get screwed in the -*BAD WORD*-. Not because I dont qualify, not because i'm not smart enough, or good enough, simply because my skin color is white. Sorry, If Dr. Martin Luther King was still alive today, I firmly believe he'd be fighting for white people, because whats begining to happen now is the same thing that happened to African Americans 40 years ago. In closing let me say, Once I do get my degree, and I'm out in the workforce looking for a job, If an under-qualified Black/Asian/Mexican/whatever person gets hired over me for a job because of affirmitive action, I'm going to sell all my posessions and fight in court tooth and nail until the day I die. Basing a -*BAD WORD*-ing job over a skin color is WRONG. Not giving a person a job because his skin is black is wrong, just like NOT GIVING A PERSON A JOB BECAUSE HIS SKIN IS WHITE IS WRONG. Worthless.

Oh, we have a skeptic? Descartes already proved it.. I think therefore I am =). Let me just add that in my humble opinion the ideal government would be a perfect balance of democracy and socialism. Worthless.

yeah, metal gear is ok I guess.. Im looking for a zone where You run around and capture the flags in the safe zone, and run them to your teams base.. then each team tries to crack into the base and steal flags.. the arena had probably 30 different bases to choose from, it was great fun.

On a completely un-related note, can anyone point me to a real nice CTF server, Oldschool CTF, like extreme games, without the extreme mod. Thx =)

The key for you to understand the arguement, sir, is to recognize that the form of democracy that is ran in the United States is not a carbon copy of what was first introduced in greece. Thus using "As we know it" here's a crude example. However long ago caveman joe chisled a circle out of rock and discovered that it would roll around.. the wheel was born. Later people decided they wanted to make it out of wood, this was still called a wheel. Next was a wood rim with rubber around it, later came vulcanization and the wheel we know today was born. Using the simple model above, apply it to "democracy" or "X" if you will, and you will get to the point I was attempting to make. This all stemmed from your crack at our president having "devine right" or being a "king" and who knows what other ludicrous statement you made. In sarcasm, perhaps, but sarcasm deserves sarcasm in return. Afraid to lose something on a message board, heh, ok. Bottom line is stop filling your posts with drivel like "I dont even know why I try.." etc, (your last post was a good one.) You talked out your -*BAD WORD*- so much about the greeks that I could only assume you had first hand knowledge of them I guess I was mistaken, my appologies. Again, the "democracy" that the greeks practiced is a far cry from whats going on today, ideologies can evolve to. No comment, I could make some skewed reference to the United State being the only remaining superpower and relate it to the "intelligence" of our founding fathers, but I wont go there. Deep breaths, serenity now.. serenity now... I've made my point above, I don't think I should do it again. Democracy "as we know it", without the United States in the picture Europe would be doing their daily "sieg hails" instead of hail marrys (no.. im not catholic, neither is all of europe, I just thought that was kinda catchy) And in response to your signature, since you're such a big fan of the facts. Around one million Iraqis died as a result of Hussein's wars and policies. Up to 730,000 Iranians perished during the Iran-Iraq War. Between 60,000 and 100,000 Iraqi dissidents and Shi'ite Muslims are estimated to have been killed during Hussein's reign. Over 100,000 Kurds were killed or "disappeared". (M!@#$%^&* graves discovered following the US occupation of Iraq in 2003 suggest that the total combined figure for Kurds, Shi'ites and dissidents killed could be as high as 300,000). Amnesty International estimates that at the time of Hussein's downfall in April 2003 there were about 300,000 Iraqi refugees around the world, with over 200,000 residing in Iran. Other sources claim between three and four million Iraqis, or about 15% of the population, fled the country seeking refuge. Moral of the story? As long as he provided oil and remained a member of the UN.. the Europeans were happy, suddenly America goes to remove him from power, and we're the bad guys? Heh.. bottom line is not supporting America in remove Saddam is support his actions. Not Supporting America IS Supporting the killing of 1 million + of his own citizens. Not supporting america is supporting rape, murder, and tyrany. You may disagree with how we did it, and thats great, but at the end of the day you should atleast say "but they did a good job removing a real son of a -*BAD WORD*- from the face of this earth." The facts are that we went into Iraq, we removed Saddam, and now we're attempting to make the place a safer place for the people there. Those are Facts. If you have facts that show the contrary, please site them and show them, no spin, just facts. You wont find a legitimate source that shows conclusivly that we're there for oil, or for any other reason but to remove Saddam from power. While I know this will induce a response, I'll try to make this my last post on the thread.. as nintendo said, I wont be changing any minds with my posts =) Worthless- I've got a PHD in worthless.

Sorry, I wasnt aware you were alive back when the greeks tried their hand at democracy, I'll rephrase so you'll understand it. Americans have founded the most recent attempt at democracy. There, happy? Yes.. funny that those "brady bunch of europeans" had to leave that -*BAD WORD*-hole over there that the Europeans still have -*BAD WORD*-ed up to this day, and come to a place where they could start over. If you wish to engage in an intellectual battle, I'll be more than happy to do so with you, but if you want to treat eachother as equals and discuss things, i'd much rather do that.aah, ok. Then what was Korea, Vietnam, Chiapas, Iraqi Freedom, etc. all about? baah, why do i even bother Major as in the scheme of WWII, I Don't put Korea, Vietnam, or Iraqi Freedom on that scale. Though yes, we played the "white horse" role in all. I wish you wouldn't bother.. if you feel that you are intellectually superior to people here, please dont come back, but I can promise you that you aren't. We could make a whole other thread on post WWII politics, but i assume you can agree that if the United States hadn't drawn the line at Berlin, that communism would have spread across all of Europe. Vietnam was a huge mistake, I wont go into it. Worthless

Worse isnt the word for it, its called WW3 (If not 4 by that time) Worthless

This is true, and it is a common mistake to call the United States government a democracy, it is truely a republic. The only case where we are a democracy is our election of presidents, but I guess even then that could be argued with the whole electoral college bit Notice I said "Democracy as we know it", I wont go any further (again another case of jumping the gun without reading the comment) I did make the point of us preventing Russia from engulfing a war-torn Europe, and make no mistake the "Cold War" was truely a war. That span of time was the closest the world ever been to not existing. If you want to downplay the power of 1000's of icbm's on each side, you're a fool. It was also more than "you two growling at eachother".. It was the United States growling on behald of ourself and war-torn Europe. Make no mistake, had we not took a stand then you all would be working the fields right now so you could meet your monthly grain quota to send to moscow. Worthless