FMBI

Not to mention performance All true, but I also saw a few other things along this line that suggest they might actually be working towards developing it now. I also dislike the idea of having a central computer only, but I'm reasonably certain that they'd allow you to keep an independent operating system as well.. or something.

Shh, I think Veg might be lurking, but.. It is very plausible that, with the influence corporate interests already have in the government (even Obama's gotten something like $100,000 from oil companies, and millions from !@#$%^&*orted other corporate donors), a situation could arise in which a group like BlackRock, a major weapons company like Boeing, or a major manufacturer like Toyota could quietly purchase controlling stakes in a large number of other firms, while simultaneously using money and lobbying influence to break down government regulations against that. Eventually, if a group were large enough, it could theoretically dominate the government and from there on, it would be home free in the race to take over more portions of the global economy. I don't personally believe one company could do this, because the economy's just too big, but if a number of them got together, then they could easily control the entire economy. I'm trying to think of a good sci-fi example, and the only I'm coming up with is Shipstone, from Heinlein's awful novel Friday.

Fine, Veg, I'll change that statement. Israel has a minor ally in South Africa. And it might get support from a few Maronites. Other than that, GG. As far as your "land" statement, let me compare two quotes of yours. o_O So.. In other words, the Jews were justified in claiming Israel (and kicking out hundreds of thousands of Palestinians) because land doesn't matter, but if the Palestinians go nuts and try to kick the Jews out, they're suddenly evil fanatics who are persecuting the poor Jews? Umm.. Yeah.

Well, Veg, I dunno about you, but I find the term "African-American" slightly more pleasing than most alternatives. Nothing wrong with the word black, but if it makes the media feel happy, they can have their term. dark, if I may remind you, Bush's stated policy is abstinence only - while he's wasting the money by throwing it in the wrong direction, that doesn't mean any serious contraceptive aid would be wasted. Also, yes, a lot of our geopolitical position depends on keeping Africa's population down - Veg is, in a sarcastic way, correct. Also, That's BS. A lot of governments, especially Nigeria's, would happily back the use of contraceptives if they had a foreign source. Weak, unstable, central governments have a much harder time consolidating their authority when the population is increasing at a rate of 2.5% a year. The old tribal concept of "have lots of kids because you need long-term support" is much less attractive when you've got massive slums that breed (hee hee!) unrest and civil war.

"(insert re!@#$%^&*ed groups, mainly liberals)" What the !@#$%^&* is that supposed to mean? Sub-Saharan Africa has some of the highest birth rates, and lowest economic growth rates, in the world. And unless one of those two factors changes, it's going to be stuck in a slump for the next few decades. (I don't foresee a change in the economic position, due to continuing economic neocolonialism, but that's another topic altogether) Admittedly, a lot of it is due to rape, but in the majority of cases, it's simply a cultural desire to have extremely large families. Unless we get sex education and contraceptives in there, Darfur's gonna look like an ice-cream stand compared to the rest of the continent in 20 years.

togofoyo from HZ. And, she is underage. He brags about it all the time. Plus, she does act like he's mentally abusing her. However, there's no need to fear - they "aren't having sex, you immature kids," in his words.

I assume you're referring to the Jewish Autonomous Oblast? dark, the #1 misconception is that Israel "can't make peace while it's surrounded with fanatical muslim neighbors". While its neighbors do certainly have the capacity to take it out, ironically, they aren't doing so when it's in their interests to. Egypt has been entirely peaceful since the post-73 agreements, Syria and Israel have been privately negotiating for a while, and Jordan's never been a threat. So, while I predict an absolute defeat of Israel if it attacks any of its neighbors, that isn't to say the neighbors will attack it. Hamas lacks the capability to do serious damage without a military distraction (as Astro said), and Hezbollah, while very tough, and obviously threatening to Israel, is devoted to gaining popular control in Lebanon, and thus won't be a serious threat for several more years - by which time Israel will probably have made a permanent peace. Also, note that I'm not advocating a full-fledged attack on Israel, though, as a war-fantasizer, I relish the thought of anything that could seriously upset the international balance. I don't give a !@#$%^&* one way or the other, but something's gotta give eventually, and unless Israel takes the "right way" out, it won't have a chance at survival in the long term.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44891000/jpg/_44891048_langur466nadler.jpg

Other than the CAD part, it was funny.

Link

2pac, you're just as much of a pedo as he is. Admit it.

That is one sick pic.

National Review is one of the most obviously neocon sources out there, hence my disapproval. Also, again, you need to look at it in terms of historical context. Israel was well known back in the day for taking a minor incident and using it as an excuse to kill dozens of people at a time. In line with their penis-length contest mentality, they probably felt the need to put down the uppity Arabs again, and decided to go with the old-time strategy. I personally find it much more believable that Israel had the war already planned out and used the kidnapping as an excuse to launch it, than to think that Israel was willing to kill 1000 people and destroy most of southern Lebanon in an honest, but failed, attempt to rescue its personnel. Lastly, Israel has no chance in !@#$%^&* of scraping together a coalition to defend it. France and Britain would have, in the good old days, but that was only when they saw political gain in it. Western Europe is even more dependent on Arab oil than the US is, and an embargo would be ten times as harmful this time around. Even if nobody else interfered, Libya, Iran, and Algeria would probably cut off, or at least cut down, exports. And that's !@#$%^&*uming Israel even has allies - it doesn't. Europe is much less forgiving of the Palestinian situation, so you'd be left with the US and possibly a few people from ASEAN or the old SEATO zone who'd help out. Which isn't so bad, except that you'd definitely trigger a general oil embargo, you'd have Europe sucking Russia's !@#$%^&* just to keep the lights on, and you'd watch US military power face a serious dilemma - pull out and let Israel face an all-out terrorist campaign from pissed off Arabs, or stay in and watch public support totally dissolve. I still see no way out for Israel, except for peace.

Veg, rofl @ you linking to National Review. Also, while you are correct in saying that Hezbollah started the aggression in 2006, they did not start the war in 2006. What most people don't realize is that the 2006 war was just a long-overdue continuation of Israel's Ben-Gurion policies, where massive (ie, 75-100 people dead) raids would be planned so that Israel could "retaliate" whenever any of the Arab states did anything. Astro - Syria won't fall apart. We've spent 91 years waiting for oppressive regimes to fall apart, but, with the exception of the USSR, Iraq, and various African states, very few significant "regime changes" have actually occurred, and the revolutionary regimes that replace them often pursue very similar policies. Besides, as Iraq showed us, war is a very good thing for authoritarian states, unless the population is already very pacificistic, as with Russia. Egypt is dependent on the US, but remember that N!@#$%^&*er went to the USSR in the 50s, against his better instincts. I see no reason why the current fairly similar (though non-populist, and with few democratic pretenses) government couldn't become Venezuela 2.0 and get support from Russia, China, or any of the various arms-dealing states, such as South Korea or Singapore. And we also saw back in 1973 that Egypt has a much stronger long-war capability than Israel does. Hamas is weak, but they can blow away hundreds of Israelis within days using suicide bombs, and they could probably break down blockades, divert military forces, and threaten the Israeli government. Remember how the government panicked when Saddam sent a few dozen SCUDs at them? Imagine having a full-blown paramilitary insurgency, and being unable to shut it down. Hezbollah can easily infiltrate into Israel and kill, at the least, a few thousand civilians, which would, as with Hamas, put the government under incredible pressure, and severely weaken the military's position on the other fronts. Basically, none of these factors could bring down Israel alone, but combined, there's no conceivable way they could lose, except for direct US military intervention. Syria and Egypt could just grind down Israel's military over a few weeks, while the twins (H&H.. how cute) could mop up inside its borders. And I mentioned the chemical weapons because, if Israel felt it was going too far, it is likely they'd pull out the nukes. Knowing you're gonna go too is, as they say, quite a deterrent. edit - And keep in mind that the demographics have also steadily been moving in the Arab's favor. Israel has to make a final political settlement within 5 years, or else they're going to get run over no matter what happens. So either they have a good peace, a bad war, or a bad peace.

I lol'd. And I liked it.

Link One of the biggest heroes of the cold war. Goodbye, old crazy-beard.

That nasty odor is more commonly known as "hot aroused girl".. it's a good thing.

Trained, as someone who knows absolutely nothing about psychology, have you considered going on a vacation for a week and just cutting it off right there? It'd be a good "jumping-off" technique methinks, although you'd have to be careful once you got home.

Link Ooh, that fat little Fresnoan predicted this 2 years ago. Lovable little butterball. I am, of course, referring to War Nerd's 2006 Hezbollah war column which got pretty much everything right. So now Israel has Syria armed with the latest anti-tank weapons and chemical weapons, Egypt with a !@#$%^&*load of aircraft and tanks, Hamas with plenty of suicide bombers and small arms, and Hezbollah with rockets, more anti-tank weapons, and enough small arms to mow down half the civilians in Israel. And this is the country that's still considering bombing Iran's nuclear facilities.. Geniuses, they ain't.

True, but would you want your little brother / sister / kid stumbling onto porn via their youtube wanderings? A lot of them aren't even blocked with the 18+ warning.

I like girls who make posts like Lynx just did.

2pac, are you really that stupid? Man, you've managed to turn this entire forum into a flame war. nj.

FYI 2pac, I'm actually naturally underweight. I've never been able to put on weight; neither a completely unhealthy diet nor (alternately) bulking-up exercises have !@#$%^&*isted me in that regard. !@#$%^&*, I'm probably in better shape than your dad, and look what he managed to do with his energy. Edit - edited for the !@#$%^&* of it.

LIKE LOL THAT WAS LIKE OBVIOUS SARCASM LOL LOL!!! LOL!

2pac, not many girls want to have sex with an obese, drug-addicted, re!@#$%^&*ed 12 year old. Sorry. Though I'm sure lots of 'em would get in bed with X. Anyone who moans like that..