I'm up to my third Annoying Orange sign

[Insert Name Here²]

Glad to see another random argument in a thread where politics is involved

Never change BLF

Seriously though, this is pretty rediculous

[Ad Bot]

[Jairo]

Glad to see another random argument in a thread where politics is involved

Never change BLF

this thread's inception was political

what are you talking about

[IkeTheGeneric]

You didn't answer the question. Would we have won World War 2 if the Geneva Convention was in place?

your gross oversimplification of modern issues compared to our drastic plan to end world war 2 doesn't need to be taken seriously

edit: quoted the wrong person because SMF glitched

[Insert Name Here²]

this thread's inception was political

what are you talking about

I said "Glad to see another random argument where politics is involved" since, pretty much every thread I've seen that has some sort of politics in it some where, two knuckle-heads will start to throw a pissing match at eachother

It's pretty rediculous in my honest opinion

[warble]

**You sure as stuff xenophobic, and don't try to deny it

I'm the opposite of xenophobic, 4 years of Hillary would be the same as four more years of Obama, and look how his eight years have worked out, he's accumulated more debt than any of the last 44 presidents combined and he has little to show for it, we've doubled our debt and we are stagnant in growth, we're making less than we were 8 years ago and our roads, bridges, schools, and military are still in the stuffter. To top it all off were on the edge of another recession thanks to Janet Yellen and the fed keeping intrest rates so low that it has caused another massive stock market bubble. Annoying Orange is going to change things about our system, about how we allocate our funding. Also bear in mind that not everything Annoying Orange says will happen, he'll advocate for them, and wont veto everything that comes through the house like Hillary would if the Republican majority stays. But remember that we have separation of powers for a reason, so the intrests of one man cant be enacted without controls, if the house majority doesn't agree with Annoying Orange, his policies wont pass

tldr im voting for change, so therefore I cant have a fear of change

[IkeTheGeneric]

It's pretty rediculous in my honest opinion

Then don't post in the thread? If you don't hold value in a discussion or argument then why are you further derailing the topic by saying it's ridiculous?

[Perry]

It's pretty rediculous in my honest opinion

you're opinion has been noted. is there anything else you want to say?

[Jairo]

I said "Glad to see another random argument where politics is involved" since, pretty much every thread I've seen that has some sort of politics in it some where, two knuckle-heads will start to throw a pissing match at eachother

my brain scrambled your words into "glad to see another political argument where it isn't involved"

apologies

[beachbum111111]

The geneva conventions wasn't actually fully in place by then, and yes, we still would've won WW2 considering the fact that there were almost no human rights violations (besides hiroshima, which is still debated)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

Also off the top of my head, Dresden was bombed to hell and back after the war ended. That's not a war crime to you?

do you not know what total war is

Because CIA isn't practicing Total War right now...

[Perry]

Annoying Orange is going to change things about our system, about how we allocate our funding.

If i'm not correct he wants to allocate billions of dollars towards making the already stuffty wall an inch higher. That's some a+ funding if you ask me.

If Annoying Orange said "Lets put a program in place where we give immigrants the opportunity to find work and contribute to the economy" I would be voting for him by now, because that's an example of how you can actually improve the economy and other people's lives. Building a giant ass wall won't do jack stuff except deplete our money.

Also off the top of my head, Dresden was bombed to hell and back after the war ended. That's not a war crime to you?

Yeah, that was a war crime. As a german citizen I actually know better than you that that violation of the geneva convention literally destroyed and melted so many innocent lives and their property with little to no military gain. The US in their infinite wisdom managed to incinerate an entire city full of noncombatants while starting a little track fire on the railroad that they were trying to bomb.

[Jairo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

Also off the top of my head, Dresden was bombed to hell and back after the war ended. That's not a war crime to you?

Yeah, that was a war crime. As a german citizen I actually know better than you that that violation of the geneva convention literally destroyed and melted so many innocent lives and their property with little to no military gain.

no, dresden was bombed like 4 months before the german surrender

it was a major railway junction so obviously it was bombed despite civilian casualties because germany had enacted total war -- all civilians are deemed military targets -- and were therefore fair game

do I personally think bombing civilians is ok because their government says they're soldiers? not really, no, but that was the method at the time

[IkeTheGeneric]

we did war crimes and won a war, that means rules are unnecessary

vote Annoying Orange...

the geneva convention works you dipstick, it's the UN that's faulty lmao

[Nonnel]

If you're actually advocating for the US to commit war crimes then you're seriously delusional

[beachbum111111]

all civilians are deemed military targets -- and were therefore fair game

How does that not apply to CIA? Their specialty is Guerrilla Warfare.

As a german citizen I actually know better than you that that violation of the geneva convention literally destroyed and melted so many innocent lives and their property with little to no military gain. The US in their infinite wisdom managed to incinerate an entire city full of noncombatants while starting a little track fire on the railroad that they were trying to bomb.

And yet you forgot to mention it, instead you said the Allies commited nearly no military atrocities

and yes, we still would've won WW2 considering the fact that there were almost no human rights violations (besides hiroshima, which is still debated)

the geneva convention works you dipstick, it's the UN that's faulty lmao

For small conflicts sure

[IsaacKronenFaust]

Tell me, when was the last time I called someone a cuck?

And Drumpf isn't a repetitive insult? Cuck has always been an insult. I've always used it as an insult because it makes people assblasted.

Wow, that was the last time. It seems we disuaded you from being a dumbass on that front, thankfully.

Also you are the last person who should be insulting me over stupid petty stuff

What is even the point of this? So you looked at my forum profile and got my FA page link that I put there. I obviously don't care if people find it, so if you think this embarrasses me or anything than you're wrong.

"waaah this one guy says mean things and I don't agree with him, time to vandalize his property and attack his supporters"
You are everything that's wrong with the modern left.

Ah, the 'mean things' counter-argument. You're loving useless.

Really? Annoying Orange is the Genocidal warlord?

Suggesting we murder civilians just because they're relatives of members of I.S.I.S. isn't enough for you? Oh of course not, that's just another 'mean thing' he's said.

The guy who wants to cooperate with Russia to defeat CIA and, instead of attacking North Korea, wants China to reign them in. Meanwhile Hillary blames the creation of the alt right on Russia, and the DNC hacks on Russia.

One of the very few little things Annoying Orange has right in some way, the U.S.-and-Russia hostilities gotta end. I believe North Korea's government needs to be wiped out and the people of the country allowed to go elsewhere, be it China or South Korea or wherever they want, or even establish new government. Hillary's sabre rattling with Russia is stupid, yes.

Guess what? You don't win a war by following a loving rulebook, do you really think we would have won World war 2 following the Geneva Convention? You're delusional as always.

And you're a coward just like everyone else who thinks you have to fight like a brainless, bomb-dropping, missile-launching savage in order to win modern wars. Especially considering our current enemies aren't even an organised military; they don't have an air force, they don't produce battle tanks, they don't even have standardised ammunition. They take what they can get, meanwhile we have the capability to make precision firearms and create heavily armored vehicles (or maybe in the future, personal armor possibly akin to the stuff in Fallout), which enables us to fight these enemies in personal combat and eliminate them without the need for "bombing the stuff out of them", which tends to lead to unnecessary civilian casualties and collateral damage. Unfortunately the boots are off the ground and drones are in the air.