Quake3World

SplishSplash wrote:I like to be right, and most of the time I am. See this thread for reference.

You seem to be stupid here and you are most of the time. See other threads for reference.

weak

SplishSplash wrote:weak

No really, instead of saying you are right just prove you are right. I simply see these as viewpoints but if you are competitive at least make it plausible that you are right.

SplishSplash wrote:

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 know, you're Australian,

bwahahahahahah, fucking wrong again!
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

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

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.

busetibi wrote: bwahahahahahah, fucking wrong again!
i currently live in Australia but im not an Australian,

Oh noes, you really got me there. You live in australia but you're not australian? I totally should have known that.

I better give up

China, no doubt

SplishSplash wrote:

busetibi wrote: bwahahahahahah, fucking wrong again!
i currently live in Australia but im not an Australian,

I better give up

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

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

Yes, all those facts are very relevant and totally make a difference in our discussion.

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.

SplishSplash wrote:

Ryoki wrote:Lol, that's some weird logic you got there.

Like only calling a superpower a 'super'power when it's actually superior to all others? Yeah, weird.

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

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

no you're thinking of an ultrapower. The soviet union was actually a megapower. almost too weird to believe.

Edit:
Little known fact: soviet russia combined with middle ages mongolia and ancient rome can turn into VOLTRON.

SplishSplash wrote:

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

Yes, all those facts are very relevant and totally make a difference in our discussion.

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.

youre fucked Mr I like to be right, and most of the time I am.

that is not a compelling argument

bwahahahahaha
fucking megapower
oh shit, man youve really lost it now

SplishSplash wrote:that is not a compelling argument

if thats all you can come back with,
it is.

SplishSplash wrote:

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

no you're thinking of an ultrapower. The soviet union was actually a megapower. almost too weird to believe.

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.

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:

Man, your razor-sharp wit is totally destroying me over here.

"You're fucked."

That has so much style, that's so deep. It had me puzzled for minutes, just trying to get through the layers of your brilliant retort.

"You're fucked."

I smell a Pulitzer.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Ranted like a true, bitter, defeated German.

Nightshade wrote: Ranted like a true, bitter, defeated German.

you picked the wrong post

SplishSplash wrote:

[xeno]Julios wrote: Spish, trying to surf on the semantic sea, sadly splashes.

this makes a curious sound, and the whales call it SPLISHSPLASH.

Thanks for making a lame joke instead of reading the thread.

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.

[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.

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?

fair enough - missed that bit.

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:

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:

Can you read?

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.