Finally (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12810-2004Feb4.html)

Fuck arafat and his terrorist organizations. That was my best friends security team that was blown up. Thank god he was called to other duties that day. I have no simpathy.

Arafat needs to go. He's just a rotted left over thats preventing any type of resolution to all the bullshit there.

What a jackass.

Who says we have to give them anything more than a smile and a handshake?

I say cut em off. If they cannot be grateful and thankful for what we provide then they can very well do without. Especially when they start to target our personnel in that area who are only there to try to HELP stabilize the area.

I have no simpathy.

good thing...cuz i dont know what simpathy is. if you mean sympathy...then i concur.

tierfin, the new spell checker

www.humanplague.com/archi...lnazis.jpg (http://www.humanplague.com/archive/pissoff/pics/spellnazis.jpg)

Arafat is like... the 5th richest man in the world from sploiting his own people and keeping it for himself. Under some public pressure he was forced to allow some of his assets to be reappropriated, but he still has an estimated 1.2 billion US.

good thing...cuz i dont know what simpathy is. if you mean sympathy...then i concur.

Sir, I am extremely sorry I made that spelling error. I know it angers you to no end to see someone make an innocent error in there grammar. I hope you can forgive me my exulted overlord of the English language. I would truly appreciate it if you would let this one transgression slip past us. I will try harder I promise. Jack ass.

P.S. it's BECAUSE and DON'T! Also make sure to CAPITALIZE at the beginning of a sentence.

error in there grammar

"Their". Would be spelling too and not grammar.

Jesus Pumkin Pie Christ I hate you all.

I know it angers you to no end to see someone make an innocent error in there grammar.
"Their". Would be spelling too and not grammar.
Technically, it would not even be "their." It would be something like "his/her" since "someone" is singular, and "their" is plural. :D

www.humanplague.com/archi...shmofo.jpg (http://www.humanplague.com/archive/pissoff/pics/englishmofo.jpg)

OoooOoooh Nark is right. :evil

Actually Nark is wrong, you use "their" when you are unsure of the gender or where gender isnt specified or doesnt apply.

I could be wrong, and I'm far too lazy to check, but I was always taught to either assume gender, and use either "his" or "her," or use the neutral "one" when possible.

Maybe my teachers were wrong, but I specifically recall being taught that one should never use "their" when coupled with a singular subject, regardless of the reasoning behind it.

Meh.

Afterward, he said his remarks also referred to a U.S. threat to cut off funding to the cash-strapped Palestinian Authority -- amounting to roughly $200 million a year for health, education, water and other programs run by the U.S. Agency for International Development

This why the US doesnt need UN permission to do whatever we damn well please. We support half the damn world. So as far as I am concerned what we say goes.

Actually we pay for about 40 percent of the UN budget too.

If you talk in terms of money sure, but in terms of population. Each person counts just as much as the next as far as im concerned, unless they prove that they are going to be a bane to others through their actions. So sure america pays for a lot, but should this give them a say over the whole world? Thats fucked up, friend.

Jesus Pumkin Pie Christ

Mm.

With whipped cream?

--Cen

We should kinda be the lead-dog in the pack imo.

The world is a chaotic place.. if the US didnt assert power and influence there would be a vacuum that someone or something would inevitably fill.
Are we perfect? Hell no.. but are the absolute best choice for the job atm.
We live in a hegemonic world, where there is one overwhelming super-power. This is a good thing as it creates a situation where over-all there is peace and a absence of large scale wars.

Will this change in 50 years with China? Possibly.. China will come to a cross-roads in about 10 years.. It will either drop the sham of communism and embrace capitalism and free trade, or it will aspire to challenge the US for global pre-eminence.

Taiwan is an interesting area to watch..
Hows this for a scenario..
Taiwan scheduals vote for indepence.
US discourages Taiwan, but warns China not to invade..
Terrorist attack is succesfull on US soil.
North Korea masses troops on SK border.
China secretly offers Osama Bin Laden to US.. on condition that it stays neutral in Chinas invasion of Taiwan should they vote to secede. (seems he had been "hiding" in Chinese controlled Kulun Mountains.)
US rejects the Proposal.
Taiwan votes to secede.
North Korea invades South Korea. At the same time, Iran launches invasion in Southern Iraq.
Chinese Forces begin amphibeous invasion of Taiwan.
China offers US same deal again in addition to calling on its allies China and Iran to halt invasions.

Thats the only real way to defeat the US at this time.. spreading so thin over so many theaters and giving ways out with out war.
just some random thoughts.

In that scenario, the US is "defeated" only if the loss of Taiwan as an independant non-state to mainland China is considered our defeat. NK and Iran can both be handled simuntaniously (with NK invading Seoul being the far greater of those two evils). After the clean up in Korea, China would be in open war with the US, and I honestly don't think that they can finacially sustain conflict with us.


The bitch would be China vetoing any UN resolution that came up in the security council to help the situation in either Iran or Korea because it would force the US and a few other nations to do it alone, leaving Taiwan (more)vulnerable to invasion.

Also keep in mind that an attack on taiwan would be amphibious, while there is only small need for the US navy in the south iraq skirmish, and NK is in the same relative geographic area. I imagine that China would be hard pressed to get passed a US blockade to Taiwan (doing so would be an open act of war...something even the soviets wouldnt do during the long peace)

China would be in open war with the US, and I honestly don't think that they can finacially sustain conflict with us.

Just curious about that statement. As fast as China is growing I wouldn't think they would have any problems with money even in 20 years from now. Could be wrong though.

In 20 years, who knows, but where do you think 70% of the business for their expanding market is coming from? US companys/individuals who want surfboards, shirts, and coffee pots made for them. They are a prefered trader at the moment...risk that, I dont think they will...yet.

In 2000, china spent about 41.1 billion on their military, which was 5.3 percent of their GNP. The US spent 294.7 billion on their military, which was 3.0 percent of their GNP. I'm reasonably sure they cant afford to fight us for quite a while...doesnt mean we shouldnt learn chinese though!

Ni hao, ni hao ma?
Wo de ming zi jiao Ehrney. :(

..And look (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/01/26/china.paris.ap/) where France is betting its future. The UN is quickly going the way of the League of Nations with shit like this.

Thats called sucking up...

Right now European financial authorities are in a state of panic with regard to the high value of the Euro.
While both the US and Europe fell into a recession at the same time.. America has almost totally pulled out of it while the EU continues to spiral.

This is because the American recovery has been financed almost entirely with money from Asian investors. And Conversely... Americans have been sending investment money right back into Asia.
Its a perfect situation for both.. But it leaves Europe out in the cold.
Thus the sucking up... Surprised Chirac didnt get on blow the dude.

Anyway.. dont look for the situation to change.. America is the perfect partner for Asia. There a number of reasons.
#1 North America has a huge and growing population of Asian Americans (especially West Coast).. this creates natural ties back to home nations and encourages and creates opportunity.
#2 Geographically America is a much better partner than Europe. The trade routes from Asia to the west coast of America are amazingly busy and well established.
#3 It is much easier for the Asian nations to deal with just America than multiple nations of the EU and the differences between each and the constrictive rules.
#4 It is much cheaper to do business in North America than Europe. Nations like France have seek more industry in order to generate taxes as to continue to fund failed social agendas.

Well, if Europe wants to get out of the recession, they need to cut their taxes. Even China (http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/publications/digest/981/rabushka.html) knows they have to do that... and they did.

Part of the European recession has to do with the US allowing the dollar to be devalued, which is murder on Euro trade. It forces US markets to look for domestic sources, decreases tourism to Europe, and forces Euro businesses to slash profits in order to compete.