Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   So...turns out al Qaeda controls more territory now than ever. So, we got that going for us   (cnn.com) divider line 176
    More: Sad, al-Qaeda, Middle Eastern, Anbar, Ramadi, Peter Bergen, Prime Minister Nuri, Idlib, Anbar Province  
•       •       •

6132 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2014 at 11:12 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



176 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-10 12:19:45 PM  
Maul555:  We are dealing with people that would wipe out billions of us if they could just press a red button.

No. No we're not. We're dealing with people armed with IEDs, old soviet surplus RPGs and AK-47s who simply want us the fark off their holy ground and to stay the hell out of their domestic politics.

The other side of this conflict are a bunch of rich business men who are using the US military as their own personal security guards to protect their oil interests.
 
2014-01-10 12:23:22 PM  

Ghastly: Maul555:  We are dealing with people that would wipe out billions of us if they could just press a red button.

No. No we're not. We're dealing with people armed with IEDs, old soviet surplus RPGs and AK-47s who simply want us the fark off their holy ground and to stay the hell out of their domestic politics.

The other side of this conflict are a bunch of rich business men who are using the US military as their own personal security guards to protect their oil interests.


no.  they hate our culture and our very way of life.  They advocate killing us all, just like the jews.   these are religious extremists who believe they are doing the work of god, and they are willing to kill themselves and their children to achieve their goal.
 
2014-01-10 12:23:33 PM  
master_dman:
Uh.. no.  We didn't go in and kill everything in sight.  We failed miserably.  We quit and gave up.

It shouldn't have been fought in the first place. Communism burns itself out eventually under its own corruption. This would have been accelerated without an enemy for those regimes to turn their citizens anger towards.

Going all-in in Korea would have started WWIII.

I don't know about you, but I personally like living a life where I don't have to stab my next meal to death with a stone tipped spear and dieing of cancer before I'm 30 because of radioactive contamination in my ground water.
 
2014-01-10 12:24:07 PM  

Ghastly: drivingsouth: [dancingczars.files.wordpress.com image 480x360]

That better be irony, Mister! That man is Al Qaeda's biggest hero. He's done more to unite and strengthen Al Qaeda than Bin Laden did.


Other than that whole, kill them where we find them bit.  Bush was pretty good about killing them.
 
2014-01-10 12:25:32 PM  
Maul555:
no.  they hate our culture and our very way of life.

Okay, now we're getting deep into the cliche territory that leads me to believe you are a troll. Well done sir, you got me to bite but you should have quit while you were ahead.

31.media.tumblr.com

 
2014-01-10 12:28:18 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: Ghastly: drivingsouth: [dancingczars.files.wordpress.com image 480x360]

That better be irony, Mister! That man is Al Qaeda's biggest hero. He's done more to unite and strengthen Al Qaeda than Bin Laden did.

Other than that whole, kill them where we find them bit.  Bush was pretty good about killing them.


Other than the five more springing up for every one that he killed part. All his aggression did was further radicalise the Muslim world against us. People who had probably never given a second thought about the world wanted the US dead after their wedding party was interrupted by a cruise missile.
 
2014-01-10 12:33:18 PM  
Infernalist:
If that's what he meant, then maybe that's what he should have said.

No, I said it WASN'T what he meant.  It just made me think of the Korean war in terms of "not a real war" and set of the chain of logic that I thought I would share.

/penis.
 
2014-01-10 12:37:53 PM  

Infernalist: the money is in the banana stand: Infernalist: master_dman: War NEVER really works unless you go in with the realization that you MUST kill everything alive in the area.  The last REAL war was WWII.  You just go in and carpet bomb.

Korean war veterans think you're full of shiat.

The Korean War was a war waged between the North and the South that effectively has not ended but instead established a division between North and South Korea. With the ME, you are dealing with militant Islam whose goal is world domination, expansion, and the conversion or genocide of everyone else. If all they wanted was their little territory and be left alone, that's one thing but they will not accept any sort of negotiation. Further, there is really no cohesive "other" side to the coin to maintain equilibrium.

That's awesome.  Also completely irrelevant to my post, but okay?


Korea is relevant to the Middle East question as it relates to our biggest failure in the Middle East:  supporting a sustainable economic model.

When we fought WW II, we destroyed Germany and Japan.  But we then stayed around to help build their economy.  The Soviet Union helped East Germany.  Our work in Germany was a radical departure from what we did after WW I and we all know how well that turned out.  After WW II, however, we stayed around and helped put into place, among other things, supremacy of the rule of law, equality of all citizens before the law, and individual economic security, rather than a centrally planned economy and a system of laws that are subject to the caprices of whoever happens to be in power at the moment.  The differences between East and West Germany were stark.  After reunification, the East wholeheartedly embraced the Western model and look at the progress it has made.

Similarly with Japan, we hung around and had a great deal of influence in developing their new government.  Japan is a very successful country today because of her rule of law and economic model.

North and South Korea are another example of how a form of government based on laws, not individuals, and a free, secure economy tend to drive out elements like Al Qaeda.  This is an example of how the same culture, the same people, the same history can result in diametrically opposed results.

In the Middle East, dictators are the rule.  Economic insecurity is the order of the day.  The law is a capricious concept.  There have been glimmers of success but the terrorists and Islamicists, going back to the PLO, have squelched every opportunity.  Egypt has an opportunity to restore its sanity but I don't see a lot of hope elsewhere.

Meanwhile, in Israel, a system of government based on laws, equality, economic security, and religious freedom (yes, it's a lot easier being Muslim in Israel than it is being Jewish in Iran) function in that same region.

Where the U.S. completely screwed the pooch, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, and the list goes on, is not using every ounce of influence we could muster, along with European allies, to move those countries in the direction of U.S., European, Japanese, or Israeli forms of government based on laws and not dictators.  I'm not sure it could be accomplished everywhere but if we could get a few countries in the region going, the others would be hard pressed to avoid it for long.

As it has been put so often:  We won the war but lost the peace.

When there is a vacuum, people like the Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, etc. will rush to fill it, to nobody's advantage.
 
2014-01-10 12:40:52 PM  
A significant portion of the population in that part of the world would absolutely love to backslide into 8th Century theocracy. Minus the intellectual achievements.

You just can't fix that kind of stupid, especially externally.
 
2014-01-10 12:43:33 PM  

master_dman: Infernalist: master_dman: War NEVER really works unless you go in with the realization that you MUST kill everything alive in the area.  The last REAL war was WWII.  You just go in and carpet bomb.

Korean war veterans think you're full of shiat.

Uh.. no.  We didn't go in and kill everything in sight.  We failed miserably.  We quit and gave up.

Let me rephrase it for dimwits.. To win a war.. as in.. really win a war.. you KILL everything.


You apparently know very little about the Korean conflict.  That's okay, I didn't actually expect you to be intelligent.
 
2014-01-10 12:44:08 PM  

under a mountain: Thanks Obama!


i248.photobucket.com
 
2014-01-10 12:44:23 PM  
I think it's a matter of more groups using the Al Qeada brand name because it sells better.
 
2014-01-10 12:51:44 PM  
All Wars are Bankers Wars
 
2014-01-10 12:54:54 PM  
USMC guns down young Afghan girl today.


Keeping us safe.
Freedom.
Liberators.

yeah.
 
2014-01-10 01:00:48 PM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: I think it's a matter of more groups using the Al Qeada brand name because it sells better.


There are a couple of reports that suggest that.  This article from the CSM goes into some detail about how Al Qaeda in Iraq was somewhat autonomous from HQ back in Pakistan, and describes in some ways how news reports are overhyped:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/Backchannels/2014/0109 /W hat-s-really-going-on-in-Iraq-s-Anbar-Province-video
 
2014-01-10 01:01:18 PM  

Ghastly: master_dman:
Uh.. no.  We didn't go in and kill everything in sight.  We failed miserably.  We quit and gave up.

It shouldn't have been fought in the first place. Communism burns itself out eventually under its own corruption. This would have been accelerated without an enemy for those regimes to turn their citizens anger towards.


Good call.  It's not like more people have died as a result of the hilariously incompetent North Korean government than died in the entire Korean war or anything.

In all seriousness, the North Korean famine in the mid 90's killed almost half as many people as the Korean War did.  If the Korean War hadn't taken place, many, many more people would have died as a result.
 
2014-01-10 01:01:43 PM  
You know what? I really don't give a flying fark anymore.
 
2014-01-10 01:13:08 PM  

I_C_Weener: Amish Tech Support: Maybe if we change our name to the United States of Al Qaeda they will become confused and start sending us money.

We need more outside the box thinking like this.


Or they sue you for copyright infringement, and then you get them in court, and BAM! Lawyered!!!!
 
2014-01-10 01:28:22 PM  
Well, when you spend five plus years on the run, you cover a lot of ground...
 
2014-01-10 01:29:18 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Infernalist: Just an fyi, the vast surge of military volunteers came in the weeks after 9/11 when we were focused on Afghanistan.

But, by all means, continue to foam at the mouth, it's amusing.

I have no problem with those folks. None at all. In fact, anyone who signed up between the 9/11 attacks and the beginning of the war drumming in Iraq I count as heroes. Unfortunately they got stuck in a position where they were required to participate in something they really didn't sign up for.


I had just received my discharge papers in June of 2001.  On Sept 12 I was at the recruiters office trying to get back in so I could go help make Afghanistan a smoking hole in the ground.  He told me no, that I was now old and busted but thanks for offering.

As soon as that clown in the Whitehouse started yammering about Iraq, I knew it was farked, and thanked my lucky stars that recruiter had already filled his quota.
 
2014-01-10 01:40:12 PM  

gshepnyc: We should never have treated them like a military enemy. We should have treated them like we did the Cosa Nostra other organized crime syndicates. And many people were saying that at the time but the Bushies and their mouth-breathing acolytes regarded that suggestion as tantamount to treason - like they regarded all other forms of criticism.

By treating them like a military enemy, we raised them up to a level (in terms of their ability to recruit, raise fund and sell their message) that they never could have managed on their own. If we had treated them like low mobsters, on par with pimps and child pornographers and drug pushers, we'd have done a lot better.


I'm pretty sure that it was the global realization that a small group could effectively reach out and disrupt a superpower.  The 'enemy' (us), was proven to be reachable, making the goal of 'teaching the enemy a lesson' a realistic one.
 
2014-01-10 01:44:47 PM  
Bush was stupid for starting the war

Obama was stupid for just saying "Fark it." and leaving.


Did I pretty much cover the entire thread?
 
2014-01-10 01:59:15 PM  

Franco: Carn: Tune in to Fox this January for the hilarious new sitcom Enlisted.  Join up today!!

That's nothing. You should see the the infomercial on Saturday mornings for the US Army called Army Strong that's run for little kids. At least GI Joe was subtle.

Plus economic conscription is still conscription. In this country you have three choices as youth for an occupation,  McWallmart, College-debt trap (which just makes the military more tempting), the military, or jail.



I see you can count to potato. How about signing up for the Army? I hear 11B is good MOS for people with your skills.
 
2014-01-10 02:07:26 PM  
flak attack:
Good call.  It's not like more people have died as a result of the hilariously incompetent North Korean government than died in the entire Korean war or anything.

In all seriousness, the North Korean famine in the mid 90's killed almost half as many people as the Korean War did.  If the Korean War hadn't taken place, many, many more people would have died as a result.


There never would have been a North or South Korea if it weren't for Western colonial interference, just as there never would have been a North or South Vietnam. Both countries should have just been left to run their governments the way they seem fit. Without an ever present antagonist and economic sanctions Korea would likely have experimented with communism and like China and Vietnam found it doesn't work and transitioned naturally towards a free market economy.

America ends up making its own enemies because big money uses its military might to bully other countries into doing what they want.
 
2014-01-10 02:12:36 PM  

Maul555: The middle east sometimes makes me wish that we still carpet bombed...    I hate to say it, but the only ultimate solution might be to completley wipe out the places that produce pieces of shiat like the taliban.  but that would be a crime right?


Have you considered cultural genocide?  If the girls are playing with Barbie Dolls and the guys are watching porn, they're NOT launching suicide attacks.  I've seen some well-written articles that suggest that that was (part of) Bush's goal.  Invade Iraq in order to pull a Germany/Japan after WW2-equivalent, and then seduce them to our side via showing that it could be a success.  It'd take a generation (Heck, we're still in Germany and Japan.  We just don't call it an occupation any more), but a thriving, semi-secular Middle East is less of a threat than a poor, prideful, failed Middle East.
 
2014-01-10 02:14:58 PM  
History has proven that when one country fights another, there is a clear outcome. (Except the Korean War..)
History has proven that fighting an insurgency (Taliban, Al Qaeda etc.) there is no clear outcome.

Let them have a country, then we have a target we can pound into submission from the air.
 
2014-01-10 02:15:51 PM  
The minute they take over actual control of a country (or a large enough province of a country like Syria with no strong central government) and make any threats against us, we bomb the ever living shiat out of them.
 
2014-01-10 02:19:18 PM  
meyerkev:  Invade Iraq in order to pull a Germany/Japan after WW2-equivalent, and then seduce them to our side via showing that it could be a success.  It'd take a generation (Heck, we're still in Germany and Japan.  We just don't call it an occupation any more), but a thriving, semi-secular Middle East is less of a threat than a poor, prideful, failed Middle East.

The US was in Germany and Japan after the occupation to protect them from the USSR. Now we are in Germany and Japan because there are entire towns whose economy revolves upon supplying the US military bases in those towns and they don't want them to leave.

That and to secure the world's supplies of Scheiße and Tentacle porn.
 
2014-01-10 02:23:29 PM  

Ghastly: That and to secure the world's supplies of Scheiße and Tentacle porn.


I just hope I'm not alive when we hit "peak Scheiße porn".
 
2014-01-10 02:37:02 PM  

flak attack: CruJones: This may mean something, I have no idea, but I don't know if judging them by the square mileage they control is a good method.  Are their numbers up, more attacks, etc.?  Or do they just control a huge swath of nothing?

It pretty much means nothing and, despite the sensationalist headline, the article itself only says that it seems that Al Qaeda backed groups control more territory than ever.  It then goes on to mention that AQ backed groups control parts of Iraq and Syria.  This pretty much contradicts the idea that they control more territory than ever, given that the AQ backed Taliban controlled Afghanistan, which is larger than Iraq and Syria combined.  It also states that AQ backed groups are closer to controlling a state than they ever were, which is pretty much total bullshiat, given that the Taliban actually did control Afghanistan.

This is filed under CNNOpinion for a reason.


Not to mention, AQ-affiliated groups controlled north Mali before the French moved in, and north Mali is larger what AQ controls today.  Then if you also figure al-Shabaab in Somalia, the claim gets even more ridiculous.....
 
2014-01-10 02:43:03 PM  
So they are blowing up themselves and not us?

Where's the problem?
 
2014-01-10 02:43:32 PM  

Ghastly: Smeggy Smurf: Ghastly: drivingsouth: [dancingczars.files.wordpress.com image 480x360]

That better be irony, Mister! That man is Al Qaeda's biggest hero. He's done more to unite and strengthen Al Qaeda than Bin Laden did.

Other than that whole, kill them where we find them bit.  Bush was pretty good about killing them.

Other than the five more springing up for every one that he killed part. All his aggression did was further radicalise the Muslim world against us. People who had probably never given a second thought about the world wanted the US dead after their wedding party was interrupted by a cruise missile.


Funny thing is, we can kill them faster than they can breed.  Eventually they'll run out.  Not that they need a reason to blow up, they seem to enjoy it to an unnatural degree.  Since we like blowing them up it's just natural that we're linked together.
 
2014-01-10 02:43:35 PM  

meyerkev: Maul555: The middle east sometimes makes me wish that we still carpet bombed...    I hate to say it, but the only ultimate solution might be to completley wipe out the places that produce pieces of shiat like the taliban.  but that would be a crime right?

Have you considered cultural genocide?  If the girls are playing with Barbie Dolls and the guys are watching porn, they're NOT launching suicide attacks.  I've seen some well-written articles that suggest that that was (part of) Bush's goal.  Invade Iraq in order to pull a Germany/Japan after WW2-equivalent, and then seduce them to our side via showing that it could be a success.  It'd take a generation (Heck, we're still in Germany and Japan.  We just don't call it an occupation any more), but a thriving, semi-secular Middle East is less of a threat than a poor, prideful, failed Middle East.


I dont see how cultural change of that magnitude would be possible in a culture with honor killings.  it would require killing a lot of "parents" first...
 
2014-01-10 02:47:04 PM  
As rough as it is on the locals to live under the thumb of those guys, the good thing is that the more people see Taliban-style rule up close, the more they hate it.

/All the U.S. needs to do is keep negotiating in Syria, and arming the Iraqi army and police. Eventually, Al Qaeda will fail from its own hatefulness.
 
2014-01-10 02:47:28 PM  

Ghastly: meyerkev:  Invade Iraq in order to pull a Germany/Japan after WW2-equivalent, and then seduce them to our side via showing that it could be a success.  It'd take a generation (Heck, we're still in Germany and Japan.  We just don't call it an occupation any more), but a thriving, semi-secular Middle East is less of a threat than a poor, prideful, failed Middle East.

The US was in Germany and Japan after the occupation to protect them from the USSR. Now we are in Germany and Japan because there are entire towns whose economy revolves upon supplying the US military bases in those towns and they don't want them to leave.

That and to secure the world's supplies of Scheiße and Tentacle porn.


Ah, found the articles:  http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/03/DefeatingIslam.shtmlhttp://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/09/Arabtraditionalism.shtml

Pay close attention to the parts about Japan.

/And then Kagan writes about Germany (http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/7107 ).  -  Nor should we forget that the Europe of today is very much the product of American foreign policy stretching back over six decades. European integration was an American project, too, after World War II. And so, recall, was European weakness.
 
2014-01-10 02:48:48 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: Ghastly: Smeggy Smurf: Ghastly: drivingsouth: [dancingczars.files.wordpress.com image 480x360]

That better be irony, Mister! That man is Al Qaeda's biggest hero. He's done more to unite and strengthen Al Qaeda than Bin Laden did.

Other than that whole, kill them where we find them bit.  Bush was pretty good about killing them.

Other than the five more springing up for every one that he killed part. All his aggression did was further radicalise the Muslim world against us. People who had probably never given a second thought about the world wanted the US dead after their wedding party was interrupted by a cruise missile.

Funny thing is, we can kill them faster than they can breed.  Eventually they'll run out.  Not that they need a reason to blow up, they seem to enjoy it to an unnatural degree.  Since we like blowing them up it's just natural that we're linked together.


They will run out of "martyrs" before we run out of bullets. Come to think of it, with the recent ammo shortage that may not be true.
 
2014-01-10 02:53:55 PM  
"Fight them over there so we don't have to fight them someplace around elsewhere leading to somewhere which is anywhere that isn't here and there... hurrrp"
 
2014-01-10 02:59:48 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Bush was stupid for starting the war

Obama was stupid for just saying "Fark it." and leaving.


Did I pretty much cover the entire thread?


No, you forgot that Dick Cheney is evil.
 
2014-01-10 03:02:07 PM  

Infernalist: As long as we have a Democratic President in the WH, there won't be a repeat of Iraq.

At worst, we'll see repeats of Syria and Libya.  But, that's as far as we'll go.


Afganistan?

Honestly - I can't tell if your bashing the right or the left.
+1?
 
2014-01-10 03:05:38 PM  

Ghastly: flak attack:
Good call.  It's not like more people have died as a result of the hilariously incompetent North Korean government than died in the entire Korean war or anything.

In all seriousness, the North Korean famine in the mid 90's killed almost half as many people as the Korean War did.  If the Korean War hadn't taken place, many, many more people would have died as a result.

There never would have been a North or South Korea if it weren't for Western colonial interference, just as there never would have been a North or South Vietnam. Both countries should have just been left to run their governments the way they seem fit. Without an ever present antagonist and economic sanctions Korea would likely have experimented with communism and like China and Vietnam found it doesn't work and transitioned naturally towards a free market economy.

America ends up making its own enemies because big money uses its military might to bully other countries into doing what they want.


Please, please, please tell me that you don't actually believe this garbage.

Without Western interference, Kim Il Sung still would have risen to power, still backed by the USSR and China.  His family would have still developed an iron fist on the regime based on the support of China and the USSR.  Even if things had turned out somewhat differently, let's not pretend that the China route, filled with it's own record of starvation and rampant human rights abuse, is near as good as the route SK went.
 
2014-01-10 03:06:23 PM  

Wook: Infernalist: As long as we have a Democratic President in the WH, there won't be a repeat of Iraq.

At worst, we'll see repeats of Syria and Libya.  But, that's as far as we'll go.

Afganistan?

Honestly - I can't tell if your bashing the right or the left.
+1?


You do know those don't have to be exclusive, right?
 
2014-01-10 03:16:39 PM  
Last time I checked, Al-Qaeda only numbered a few hundred members, had difficulties recruiting, and was operating on a shoe-string budget. There are also hundreds of other affiliated ME terrorist organisations out there, so try to see the big picture.
 
2014-01-10 03:39:31 PM  
imageshack.com
 
2014-01-10 03:50:05 PM  
The "War on Terror" works about as well as the "War on Drugs."

Awesome.
 
2014-01-10 04:15:24 PM  
Go watch BBC's "The Power of NIghtmares" then come back and let's talk about "Al Qaeda"
 
2014-01-10 04:21:18 PM  

Ghastly: In all seriousness, the North Korean famine in the mid 90's killed almost half as many people as the Korean War did. If the Korean War hadn't taken place, many, many more people would have died as a result.

There never would have been a North or South Korea if it weren't for Western colonial interference, just as there never would have been a North or South Vietnam.


That's true. Both would have been colonies of China.
 
2014-01-10 04:58:12 PM  

This text is now purple: Ghastly: In all seriousness, the North Korean famine in the mid 90's killed almost half as many people as the Korean War did. If the Korean War hadn't taken place, many, many more people would have died as a result.

There never would have been a North or South Korea if it weren't for Western colonial interference, just as there never would have been a North or South Vietnam.

That's true. Both would have been colonies of China.


Or Japan.
 
2014-01-10 05:06:41 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: All part of the plan. al Qaeda kills more Muslims than we ever could.


Indeed.  Al Qaeda works for us these days--they're our proxies against our real enemy in the region: Iran.
 
2014-01-10 05:08:43 PM  

Maul555: Ghastly: Maul555:  We are dealing with people that would wipe out billions of us if they could just press a red button.

No. No we're not. We're dealing with people armed with IEDs, old soviet surplus RPGs and AK-47s who simply want us the fark off their holy ground and to stay the hell out of their domestic politics.

The other side of this conflict are a bunch of rich business men who are using the US military as their own personal security guards to protect their oil interests.

no.  they hate our culture and our very way of life.  They advocate killing us all, just like the jews.   these are religious extremists who believe they are doing the work of god, and they are willing to kill themselves and their children to achieve their goal.


If a group of rich assholes killed your entire family you would want to return the favour to!

sorry but you cant kill millions of people in other nations and still be able to play the victim card.


Want to win the war on terror? Start by eleminating the CIA.
 
2014-01-10 06:12:56 PM  

teenage mutant ninja rapist: Maul555: Ghastly: Maul555:  We are dealing with people that would wipe out billions of us if they could just press a red button.

No. No we're not. We're dealing with people armed with IEDs, old soviet surplus RPGs and AK-47s who simply want us the fark off their holy ground and to stay the hell out of their domestic politics.

The other side of this conflict are a bunch of rich business men who are using the US military as their own personal security guards to protect their oil interests.

no.  they hate our culture and our very way of life.  They advocate killing us all, just like the jews.   these are religious extremists who believe they are doing the work of god, and they are willing to kill themselves and their children to achieve their goal.

If a group of rich assholes killed your entire family you would want to return the favour to!

sorry but you cant kill millions of people in other nations and still be able to play the victim card.


Want to win the war on terror? Start by eleminating the CIA.


I am not advocating killing millions of people, or even thousands.  if you followed me from my original post you would know that I am simply saying that killing millions of people may be the only solution.  a solution that we cant use, obviously.
 
Displayed 50 of 176 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report