You seem to be stupid here and you are most of the time. See other threads for reference.SplishSplash wrote:I like to be right, and most of the time I am. See this thread for reference.
next superpower
bwahahahahahah, fucking wrong again!SplishSplash wrote:I know, you're Australian,busetibi wrote: commonwealth pride?
wtf is that?
im not even english
you seem to be grabbing at straws,you whole argument is being shot down in flames and all you can do is answer with pathetic (supposedly) insults
time to get a new act, youre failing miserably here
i currently live in Australia but im not an Australian,
fuck man give it up, every way you go turns to shite
edit: cant even spell the fucking countrys name right
-
Underpants?
- Posts: 4755
- Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2001 7:00 am
precisely. China's a massive engine driving toward a vague goal without proper vision. There's absolutely zero imagination or innovation in that country; such ventures are stifled by a domineering and obsessively controlling regime. All they can do at the moment is refine previously invented processes, a great talent and also a great limitation.Dave wrote:I think China will need to come to terms with its past before it can have a bright future. Not so much economically, but they seem to lack what it takes for global social and political leadership
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
yer, you better cause youre taking out of your arse, i also have a green card, and work and have an apartment in america, does that make me an american as well as an australian?SplishSplash wrote:busetibi wrote: bwahahahahahah, fucking wrong again!
i currently live in Australia but im not an Australian,
I better give up
a clue :icon10:
get one
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
Yes, all those facts are very relevant and totally make a difference in our discussion.busetibi wrote:yer, you better cause youre taking out of your arse, i also have a green card, and work and have an apartment in america, does that make me an american as well as an australian?
a clue :icon10:
get one
I will give up now before I get such important questions like "What was busetibi's mother's maiden name?" wrong. That would be so embarrassing.
Last edited by SplishSplash on Mon Sep 12, 2005 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
youre
a superpower doesn't have to be superior to all others to be a superpower, i.e. soviet union. you're thinking of a hyperpowerSplishSplash wrote:Like only calling a superpower a 'super'power when it's actually superior to all others? Yeah, weird.Ryoki wrote:Lol, that's some weird logic you got there.
so yeah, weird
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
Re: youre
no you're thinking of an ultrapower. The soviet union was actually a megapower. almost too weird to believe.seremtan wrote: a superpower doesn't have to be superior to all others to be a superpower, i.e. soviet union. you're thinking of a hyperpower
so yeah, weird
Edit:
Little known fact: soviet russia combined with middle ages mongolia and ancient rome can turn into VOLTRON.
Last edited by SplishSplash on Mon Sep 12, 2005 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
youre fucked Mr I like to be right, and most of the time I am.SplishSplash wrote:Yes, all those facts are very relevant and totally make a difference in our discussion.busetibi wrote:yer, you better cause youre taking out of your arse, i also have a green card, and work and have an apartment in america, does that make me an american as well as an australian?
a clue :icon10:
get one
I will give up now before I get such important questions like "What was busetibi's mother's maiden name?" wrong. That would be so embarrassing.
-
Tormentius
- Posts: 4108
- Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am
Re: youre
Yeah...you realize you're arguing with everyone here who has shot your pathetic argument to shit and are also arguing with the very definition of the word superpower. You sir, are too much of a fucking moron for words to truly describe.SplishSplash wrote:no you're thinking of an ultrapower. The soviet union was actually a megapower. almost too weird to believe.seremtan wrote: a superpower doesn't have to be superior to all others to be a superpower, i.e. soviet union. you're thinking of a hyperpower
so yeah, weird
Here's Merriam-Webster's definition just in case Wiki's wasn't enough for you:
One entry found for superpower.
Main Entry: su·per·pow·er
Pronunciation: 'sü-p&r-"pau(-&)r
Function: noun
1 : excessive or superior power
2 a : an extremely powerful nation; specifically : one of a very few dominant states in an era when the world is divided politically into these states and their satellites b : an international governing body able to enforce its will upon the most powerful states
- su·per·pow·ered /-"pau(-&)rd/ adjective
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?b ... superpower
:icon27:
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
Re: youre
No one here has shot anything to shit. They all rag on and on about how Wikipedia's definition of Superpower lists other nations as superpowers, but none of them has read the last sentence, which said that the term "superpower" is commonly applied only to soviet russia and the US.Tormentius wrote: Yeah...you realize you're arguing with everyone here who has shot your pathetic argument to shit and are also arguing with the very definition of the word superpower. You sir, are too much of a fucking moron for words to truly describe.
You're actually the first one to give a different source. And a more credible one than Wikipedia at that. Congrats to that.
But you know what difference it makes? none at all. Because it's ultimately a matter of opinion and I'm willing to bet my left nut that lots of history professors are fighting over this as well sometimes.
But since they gave me such a brilliant and hilarious headstart by quoting something as proof that actually supports my argument, of course I'm going to make fun of them.
What I really wanted to say is in my second post. Too many people are caught up in stereotypes.
Edit: And when seremtan started making up words I was laughing so hard I couldn't do anything but go along with it.
-
Nightshade
- Posts: 17020
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am
Ranted like a true, bitter, defeated German.SplishSplash wrote:OMG guys have you heard? china has a growing economy and lots of people!
Now that we won "US vs. Russia", who will win "US vs. China"? OMG OMG
Why should there even be a next "superpower". Who knows how the world's power system will be set up. Were there "superpowers" before WWII? No.
And if China, Russia or the US go to all out war, we're all gonna be dead anyways.
But have fun looking forward to the next war for you to die in, stupid yanks.
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
-
[xeno]Julios
- Posts: 6216
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am
SplishSplash wrote:Thanks for making a lame joke instead of reading the thread.[xeno]Julios wrote: Spish, trying to surf on the semantic sea, sadly splashes.
this makes a curious sound, and the whales call it SPLISHSPLASH.
oh i read it, and there may or may not be a point to reserving the term "superpower" to refer to a concept that is only viable within a constrained global context.
But to make the claim that people in the past didn't suffer from cancer simply because they hadn't invented the word is a bit silly, unless you are invoking some argument whereby the symptoms of cancer are experienced differently due to the stigmas and social understanding of cancer.
But even then, people's cells reproduced wildly and they died painful deaths, whether or not you call it cancer.
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
you probably overlooked the post where I said that at that point I didn't really care and just wanted to give the most surreal answer?[xeno]Julios wrote: oh i read it, and there may or may not be a point to reserving the term "superpower" to refer to a concept that is only viable within a constrained global context.
But to make the claim that people in the past didn't suffer from cancer simply because they hadn't invented the word is a bit silly, unless you are invoking some argument whereby the symptoms of cancer are experienced differently due to the stigmas and social understanding of cancer.
But even then, people's cells reproduced wildly and they died painful deaths, whether or not you call it cancer.
-
SplishSplash
- Posts: 4467
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 8:00 am
Can you read?R00k wrote:In other words, Shit-Stache tries to speak authoritatively on a subject, gets called out and shown what an idiot he is, then retreats to the "god! it's just an opinion!" stance.
Nice. :icon14:
They quoted a Wikipedia article which seemingly supported their argument. If you didn't read past the first sentence.
After that, it said exactly what I had stated. Which is, that the term superpower is commonly used only for the cold war conflict.
I thought that was hilarious, because they made complete asses out of themselves by not reading to the end.
But since this is a forum of half wits, everyone thinks that the single guy must be wrong and the herd must be right.
My last post (directed at Tormentius) said that it is only a matter of opinion, which it clearly is. But it's also a fact that Wikipedia agrees with my opinion.