If you're country was in danger........

[nagerous]

Enough of these annoying ass threads. I don't get why wicked would lock my thread about the game when these kind of threads, set up by brooksie, with the same right wing bs don't ever get locked and hes allowed to roam free.

How is it BS and right wing? anyone could fight for their' country, a lefty could fight for their' country, a righty could fight for their' country, anyone could, if it's so annoying don't comment on it?! just let it die!

Its not necessary this thread I'm referring to, there are numerous similar ones you've set up all based around issues like undying loyalty to country, closing down on immigration, sensitive issues like political correctness.

[muy_thaiguy]

Anyways...I would certainly do so, even if it was with my bare hands (thank you 4 years of Martial Arts, not to mention learning about all kinds of close quartered combat), up to riding around in a tank causing all kinds of mayhem.

[bradleybadly]

yeah I'd fight

I think a lot of people who say they wouldn't would change their minds once the battle began

[greenoaks]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

[Kid_A]

i'd run. i'm not dying for you douchebags!

[suggs]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

How do you think we won WWII?
WE had ludicrous dice from 1943 onwards.

[brooksieb]

Enough of these annoying ass threads. I don't get why wicked would lock my thread about the game when these kind of threads, set up by brooksie, with the same right wing bs don't ever get locked and hes allowed to roam free.

How is it BS and right wing? anyone could fight for their' country, a lefty could fight for their' country, a righty could fight for their' country, anyone could, if it's so annoying don't comment on it?! just let it die!

Its not necessary this thread I'm referring to, there are numerous similar ones you've set up all based around issues like undying loyalty to country, closing down on immigration, sensitive issues like political correctness.

well i dont go to into it and if there's a poll i put options so everyone can have there say

[Fruitcake]

nagerous wrote

sensitive issues like political correctness.

Now there is a self fulfilling statement.

[ignotus]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

How do you think we won WWII?
WE had ludicrous dice from 1943 onwards.

Yep, and Hitler made a bad fort in Dunquerke (freestyle) and used all his cards bad at eastern front!

[brooksieb]

nagerous wrote

sensitive issues like political correctness.

Now there is a self fulfilling statement.

yer not sensitive for all

[Fruitcake]

My point exactly brooksieb.

[greenoaks]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

How do you think we won WWII?
WE had ludicrous dice from 1943 onwards.

i heard hitler had problems defeating the ones in russia

[greenoaks]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

How do you think we won WWII?
WE had ludicrous dice from 1943 onwards.

i heard hitler had problems defeating the ones in russia

[greenoaks]

will random.org be used to decide who wins the battles ?

How do you think we won WWII?
WE had ludicrous dice from 1943 onwards.

Yep, and Hitler made a bad fort in Dunquerke (freestyle) and used all his cards bad at eastern front!

i heard hitler had problems defeating the ones in russia

[strike wolf]

I'd try to help. Mainly through quick attacks with a minimum risk of death.

[Jenos Ridan]

Solution is better educational programs and gun-free society (at the end).

Sure, Hitler.

[Skittles!]

Solution is better educational programs and gun-free society (at the end).

Sure, Hitler.

That is funny. Let's keep everyone stupid, and let them have guns, and then we'll have full control of the world!

[DaGip]

I would protect my home and family from any enemy, foreign or domestic. Would I join the military, though? Hell no.

Well if you join the army you could get better weapons incase that happened.

Like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFBY_xHfoBo

[Iliad]

Problem: Thug attempts to commit armed robbery and/or murder and/or rape.

Thug shot dead.

Problem solved.

But we digress.....would I fight for my country? Yes, I have, and would again.

So how did robber came in possession of a gun?
Gun is a problem of your story and second gun is the solution?
Solution is better educational programs and gun-free society (at the end).

Gun can't do a good thing because his main purpose is to kill.

He was armed with a sword

okay so you are advocating a pro-gun society but all the thugs being the honourable men they are will rob with swords. And of course shooting the thug is the best solution instead of say trying to make him be a a part of the society again

[Hologram]

Damn right I will.

Semper fi, do or die.

[Jenos Ridan]

Solution is better educational programs and gun-free society (at the end).

Sure, Hitler.

That is funny. Let's keep everyone stupid, and let them have guns, and then we'll have full control of the world!

Don't tell me some skull-drudgery about how egalitarian Hitler was; he thought strict governmental controls on guns and massive propaganda programs, some of which were passed off as education in the kindergardens, would result in his Aryan Utopia. And most anti-gun types, either knowingly but ignoring the facts (not a first) or unwittingly, support a governmental policy that Hitler practiced. Delete the Second Amendment and what stops Big Brother from taking away other freedoms? Nothing; their is no rational reason for a government to maintain civil liberties once the citizen's right to rebel is removed.

Keep people stupid, hardly. If anything, the US needs a major education reform. But nobody is really serious about making real changes, because nobody knows what is even wrong in the first place. I honestly thing that the Brits, Germans and the Japanese have a better lay-out, separate the college-bound kids from the ones who would be better served with some sort of vocational training and educate along those two tracts. But we don't do that here and for no good reason. Watch, some hollow-head is going to defend the failing state of affairs with cries of "more money." That's the last thing you do; when you have an open, bleeding wound, the last thing you give the patient is blood thiners. If you do, they'll bleed out faster and die. If you simply throw money at a problem, it only creates more mess to clean up. While I'm on the rant, Keysian Economics do not work in times when the economy is relatively stable, all this pointless deficit spending must stop because their is no need for it. But the mass of sheeple don't see, the entrenched buereaucrats in DC refuse to see the truth that stares them square in the face, the Politicians are clueless about what exactly the problem is and those who see the bleedin' forest for the bleedin' trees are marked as some sort of fringe lunatic.

..................

Thanks for inspirering a massive rant.

[Frigidus]

Solution is better educational programs and gun-free society (at the end).

Sure, Hitler.

That is funny. Let's keep everyone stupid, and let them have guns, and then we'll have full control of the world!

Don't tell me some skull-drudgery about how egalitarian Hitler was; he thought strict governmental controls on guns and massive propaganda programs, some of which were passed off as education in the kindergardens, would result in his Aryan Utopia. And most anti-gun types, either knowingly but ignoring the facts (not a first) or unwittingly, support a governmental policy that Hitler practiced. Delete the Second Amendment and what stops Big Brother from taking away other freedoms? Nothing; their is no rational reason for a government to maintain civil liberties once the citizen's right to rebel is removed.

Aside from clearcut Godwin's Law violations, Hitler had many different government and economic politics, some of them effective ones. We can't just ignore a policy because some toolbox used it. Let's say he had supported gun freedom should we have said "Oh no guys, Hitler was a gun nut, let's ban them?

[Jenos Ridan]

Aside from clearcut Godwin's Law violations, Hitler had many different government and economic politics, some of them effective ones. We can't just ignore a policy because some toolbox used it. Let's say he had supported gun freedom should we have said "Oh no guys, Hitler was a gun nut, let's ban them?

Effective, I agree. Six million dead Jews can't all be wrong. That's just in Jews, add the millions more who died in places like Dachau and Aushwitz. Add still many more millions who died fighting the Wehrmacht from 1939 to 1945. Oh yes, he was a very effective leader.

So, yeah, we can ignore a policy on the grounds of it's intended use. Hitler used gun control to further his control of the German people and the peoples of Europe in the nations he conquered; What assurance do I have that the government would not, shortly after seizing all guns or at least radically limiting them, then decide elections and independant press are too much of a burden? None, that's what.

[radiojake]

Delete the Second Amendment and what stops Big Brother from taking away other freedoms? Nothing; their is no rational reason for a government to maintain civil liberties once the citizen's right to rebel is removed.

Don't need guns to start a rebellion

[Jenos Ridan]

Delete the Second Amendment and what stops Big Brother from taking away other freedoms? Nothing; their is no rational reason for a government to maintain civil liberties once the citizen's right to rebel is removed.

Don't need guns to start a rebellion

Try it. I'd love to see the results.

Might not need them to start one, but how exactly do you plan on winning one? One of the major things the men and women of the Revolution regularly raided from Hessian and British camps were arms and munitions, example; the attack on Fort Ticonderoga. If the rebels of a modern-era Revolution do not have arms, they will be crushed in the blink of an eye.