What country will become the most powerful when Ameica has been beaten?

[nefar559]

you guys are funny. i would like to see you guys complain under the rule of one of those above countries

so u want americans to be oppress like like ours countries.


shit thats why we can say something.... to speak up!.....
what a lame statement u bring.

 

[nefar559]

think about it like this. america will never be defeated. why? the country and its leaders may be destroyed but the natural human instincts which cause the worlds conditions will just be carried out by whoever else is on top. so in effect it can only get worse.

i don't think the people in this current time is worst than say
300, or 2,000 years ago.

humans advance a lot since those times...no monarchy, better
medince, sciences...etc.

u'r statment...LMAO

 

[drankedout]

Bush is gonna kill us all.

Saddam Hussien is a terrible human being who deserves to die, but that is no reason to go to war against iraq (which i dont think we will do anyways).

 

[Mcleanhatch]

i don't think the people in this current time is worst than say
300, or 2,000 years ago. u'r statment...LMAO

let me see in both 300 years ago and probly also 2000 years ago
1. around 300 years ago people all over the Americas were losing their lands by many different countries
2. around 3000 years ago their was Egypt who was conquering everbody all over the middle east and wasnt their also the Roman Empire??? (not to sure on this timeline)

humans advance a lot since those times...no monarchy, better
medince, sciences...etc. u'r statment...LMAO

1. no monarchy---> but there is still facist/communist/dictators
2. better medicines---> but their is also more diseases/siccnesses
3. sciences ---> not all advances are good (i mean just look at CLONAID)

 

[nefar559]

let me see in both 300 years ago and probly also 2000 years ago
1. around 300 years ago people all over the Americas were losing their lands by many different countries
2. around 3000 years ago their was Egypt who was conquering everbody all over the middle east and wasnt their also the Roman Empire??? (not to sure on this timeline)

yea, u'r right.

1. no monarchy---> but there is still...communist

So? least its not monarchy or some bullshit country run by religion.

2. better medicines---> but their is also more diseases/siccnesses
3. sciences ---> not all advances are good (i mean just look at CLONAID)

again , we are living in a better time. 300, or 3,000 years
ago, billions of ppl die becuase of diseases, they didn't have
cures.

who said CLONAID was an advance?

geneticly engineered humans will be more advance than regular
humans........a future advancement.

 

[Mcleanhatch]

So? least its not monarchy or some bullshit country run by religion.

Soudi Arabia (SP), United Emirates, Iran, Taliban (before we took them out of power). there still are some out there with power

who said CLONAID was an advance?

glad to here you agree with me that Clones are immoral

 

[nefar559]

Soudi Arabia (SP), United Emirates, Iran, Taliban (before we took them out of power). there still are some out there with power

yes true, but 3,000years or 300, the world was no better
and why are we supporting Saudia Arabia?!?!?

 

[Viet Loc]

China

 

[Mcleanhatch]

and why are we supporting Saudia Arabia?!?!?

i dont know, i wish we didnt.

i think we should just drill in Alaska. experts say that the oil there should last about 20-30 years and that should be enough time for us to find alternate forms of energy so that we wont be dependant on other countries for energy.

 

[nefar559]

i dont know, i wish we didnt.

come on, i thought u were smarter.

i think we should just drill in Alaska. experts say that the oil there should last about 20-30 years and that should be enough time for us to find alternate forms of energy so that we wont be dependant on other countries for energy.

glad u'r thinking of alternatives.

 

[ToNgAn_SaV]

some bullshit country run by religion.

and believes in the DEATH PENALTY... if that's not funny style I don't know what is.

 

[Snubnoze]

1. no monarchy---> but there is still facist/communist/dictators

uhhh, facists and communists countries are ran by dictators, which ARE a monarchy...

 

[ToNgAn_SaV]

communists countries are ran by dictators

No reply just a thumbs down.:x

 

[nefar559]

uhhh, facists and communists countries are ran by dictators, which ARE a monarchy...

take the word "communists" from u'r statement.

 

[Mcleanhatch]

uhhh, facists and communists countries are ran by dictators, which ARE a monarchy...

really because i always was under the impression that monarchy had Kings, Queens, Princcess, Princes, Counts, Dukes, Emporers/Empresses ect.........

and i never heard of King Fidel Castro or King Hugo Chavez, or King Ill

 

[Snubnoze]

MONarchy, mon as in single, as in single ruler. Dictatorships are ran by single rulers. A monarchy is a form of government in which it is ran by one leader, or a small group of people....

 

[nefar559]

really because i always was under the impression that monarchy had Kings, Queens, Princcess, Princes, Counts, Dukes, Emporers/Empresses ect.........

and i never heard of King Fidel Castro or King Hugo Chavez, or King Ill

oh quit dissing leftist policitical leaders, Hugo CHavez was elected
by the people of this country.... if the april coup was successful
then the country would have been somewhat of a dictorshit.

the upper class are using the media, to make it seem like there
country is on strike.....the media is own my them, distroting the
news.

 

[Mcleanhatch]

oh quit dissing leftist policitical leaders, Hugo CHavez was elected by the people of this country

i couldnt help it LOL.

if the april coup was successful then the country would have been somewhat of a dictorshit

i heard somewhere that he altered the constitution after he was elected to suit himself. i dont remember where i read it. and basically i dont know much about the venezuela so dont pound me for spreading lies because i am just asking

the upper class are using the media, to make it seem like there country is on strike.....the media is own my them, distroting the news.

didnt you or an article you posted about a month ago state that the US was backing the people trying to take chavez out and that it wasnt really a strike and that in a couple days it was going to back fire and expose the USA for interfering. im just wondering because like i stated it was about a month ago

 

[Snubnoze]

The US has used foreign media to distort the truth in order to place in "their" leader in the past so this is nothing suprising... Look what happened with operation ajax over in Iran after WWII...

 

[nefar559]

i couldnt help it LOL.


i heard somewhere that he altered the constitution after he was elected to suit himself. i dont remember where i read it. and basically i dont know much about the venezuela so dont pound me for spreading lies because i am just asking



didnt you or an article you posted about a month ago state that the US was backing the people trying to take chavez out and that it wasnt really a strike and that in a couple days it was going to back fire and expose the USA for interfering. im just wondering because like i stated it was about a month ago

He changed the constitution to give more policital power to his
people. the lower classes, that didn't have a say in there government before chavez... its destroyed the two parties that
had been kept in power by the upper/middle class.

the USA was asking for reelections, and then 12 latin american
nations supported Chavez, which backfired on what the US said....lol