ZOMG!!!

#1 headline on my MSN/Vista toobar thingie

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28477607/

1/4/2009 1:13:34 AM

Quote :

"The page you are seeking has expired and is no longer available at msnbc.com. However, it may be available at The Washington Post. "

ZOMG!!!!

ZOMFUCKING FAIL!!!!

1/4/2009 1:19:50 AM

Lock.
Suspend.
Terminate.
Sequel.

1/4/2009 1:23:33 AM

searched washington post and couldnt find it

1/4/2009 1:40:43 AM

Hey, if a Russian analyst sees it coming, then that's good enough for me

1/4/2009 1:43:57 AM

meh... it was up when i posted it.

1/4/2009 1:50:23 AM

honestly russia got enough of its own probs right now...i aint fooled by this for a sec

1/4/2009 1:54:29 AM

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=549953

And what's funny is that joe has actually POSTED IN THAT THREAD.

1/4/2009 2:05:56 AM

in before the liz-ock

1/4/2009 2:13:30 AM

naw fuck yall. this shit is [NEW].


A Disintegrating U.S.? Critics Come Unglued: Russian's Prediction Spurs Celebrity, Scorn
By Joel Garreau
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 3, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/02/AR2009010202401.html

1/4/2009 2:24:03 AM

you posted a new thread with an expired link about an [old] subject that already has an [old] thread i posted about the [old] subject in which you started a new thread about.

maybe it's time to put down the TWW for a while....



[Edited on January 4, 2009 at 2:43 AM. Reason : MY SENTENCE IS ALMOST AS EPIC FAIL AS THIS THREAD]

1/4/2009 2:41:06 AM

dont make me get BearDawg on you.

1/4/2009 2:57:05 AM

Funny thing is, there was an old Civilization II scenario about this exact thing, called....USA 2010.

1/4/2009 4:09:23 AM

I think the article makes a good point: a lot of this is really just the Russians projecting their own insecurities upon the United States. The fact that the good professor doesn't really slice up the United States properly by more believable cultural fault lines alone casts doubts on his predictions. The idea that Alaska would voluntarily return to the Russians is absurd... more likely to go to Canada while Hawaii is more likely to just go independent Polynesian style instead of joining distant Japan or even more alien China.

Also, as the author of the column in the post points out, the United States in just the 20th century has endured far worse trauma: from the chaos of the civil rights movement to Vietnam to the Great Depression. There were days in that time when some states were on the verge of armed resistance against the Federal government. Compared to then, our current national state is quite tame. Maybe something will emerge, but as for now, I can't see a single issue or combination of issues that would violently divide the US...

1/4/2009 7:51:50 AM

I wish we would just let California go independent. California is a huge drain on society and now they are bankrupt. Let those hippie bleeding heart idiots suffer for pushing their stupid liberal policies and running themselves into the ground. Why should we have to pay just because they elected terrible state governments?

Michigan is worthless too. Someone explain to me why North Carolinian business owners were allowed to go bankrupt left and right when textiles/manufacturing jobs disappeared. It was labeled "capitalism" or "globalization". But when the automakers can't compete DESPITE all of the enormous tariffs we've already placed on foreign automakers its a national crisis.

Not only are we going to have to pay thousands more for autos than we would if we let the domestics go under and removed all of the tariffs on foreign automakers... but we're also going to have to spend our hard earned wages to prop up money hemorrhaging "companies" and pay the wages and insurance of drastically overpaid "workers". And I use workers loosely because many of them have very easy jobs that required no education and they get paid furlough when they aren't needed.

1/4/2009 11:28:30 AM

Those fiscally responsible states will learn to never do that again.

amiright?

1/4/2009 1:54:51 PM

^^ California has a republican governor and just essentially reversed a gay-rights legislation. They're not THAT liberal.

1/4/2009 2:11:22 PM

The South will rise again.

Will we take WV? I think we should just expand Virginia, since WV separated illegally anyway.

1/4/2009 3:15:50 PM

too many lazy asses for a civil war....

1/5/2009 1:41:28 AM

The civil war as we know it will not happen again.

Remember, in the previous Civil War, the south left the union and, to "unite the union once more", the north waged war. The south, to contrary belief, did not wage war or attack the north in any way. Also of note, the North waged war on southern citizens, stealing, plundering, and burning the south basically to the ground and basically annailiate the elite southern class that brought us leaders such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

This simply will not happen. I think most of us will agree that a union that must be held together by military force is not a "united" union. This was the belief of R.E. Lee and the rest of the south. This, and the murderous rampage of northern soliders on sothern citizens, was why the vatican and many foreign nations sided with the south. If a state left, it would be more of an economic war IMO. Trade would be the name of the game.

It wouldnt suprise me if a state or a group of states tried to leave the union in the future. However, we arent close to this yet. More people move around these days so you have alot of conservatives/liberals in each state. States can leave, not areas of states. It's going to take a mass movement of conservatives/liberals to certain states and the right political leaders to draft a new constiution which is what the south had at one time.


[Edited on January 5, 2009 at 12:44 PM. Reason : ..]

1/5/2009 12:33:17 PM

Quote :

"The civil war as we know it will not happen again. Remember, in the previous Civil War, the south left the union and, to "unite the union once more", the north waged war. The south, to contrary belief, did not wage war or attack the north in any way. Also of note, the North waged war on southern citizens, stealing, plundering, and burning the south basically to the ground and basically annailiate the elite southern class that brought us leaders such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. This simply will not happen. I think most of us will agree that a union that must be held together by military force is not a "united" union. This was the belief of R.E. Lee and the rest of the south. This, and the murderous rampage of northern soliders on sothern citizens, was why the vatican and many foreign nations sided with the south. If a state left, it would be more of an economic war IMO. Trade would be the name of the game. It wouldnt suprise me if a state or a group of states tried to leave the union in the future. However, we arent close to this yet. More people move around these days so you have alot of conservatives/liberals in each state. States can leave, not areas of states. It's going to take a mass movement of conservatives/liberals to certain states and the right political leaders to draft a new constiution which is what the south had at one time."

whoa... man... I think you just totally killed the vibe in this thread

1/5/2009 1:29:57 PM

Quote :

"The south, to contrary belief, did not wage war or attack the north in any way. "

you stupid motherfucking redneck hick country bumpkin

are you completely unfamiliar with the fact that the VERY FIRST recognized battle of the Civil War was when the CONFEDERATES opened fire on Fort Sumter? You know, the attack that was decided upon by the CONFEDERATE cabinet?

fucking ignorant prick

1/5/2009 2:41:30 PM

I buy my books at the Dixie Gun & Knife Classic too.

1/5/2009 3:52:00 PM

bigun20 is well renowned for his ability to kill a thread with pure stupidity.

1/5/2009 4:59:26 PM

Quote :

"whoa... man... I think you just totally killed the vibe in this thread"

Good. It is completely absurd to think that we are near secession or dismantlement of the USA....

Now to answer the people who dont have opinions, only personal attacks (which are supposed to be against the rules in the soapbox)

Ive never been to the dixie gun and knife show..matter of fact...ive never been to any gun or knife show...have you? (stereotype anyone lately)

Ill take that as a compliment from you Joe.

Quote :

"you stupid motherfucking redneck hick country bumpkin "

Lets see....I graduated with 2 engineering degrees with honors, have a job that pays what you hope to make in 3 years.....yeah, I really trust your opinion about me But then again, instead of your smear tactics, i'll get back to the point. (something none of you do)

Since you know your history goalielax, you would recall that the south seceeded from the union peacefully. After doing so, they offered to pay full sum for union properties (all forts except fort sumter and fort pickens in Florida were surrendered peacefully to the south) and to even pay the souths portion of the federal debt before leaving. The south further proposed a peace treaty with the United States. Lincoln refused everything.

Lets see...flipping through the history book here to get exact dates......

April 6th 1861 - Lincoln announced sending more supplies and men to fort sumter.
April 12th 1861 - General Beauregard and Major Anderson failed negotiations. Beauregard fired onto Fort Sumter on order from the souther government as a reaction to Lincoln's troop surge (possibly fearing union invasion of Charelston).

The south took no POW's and let every union solider return the the union. Even though its classified as a "Battle", it was really nothing than a forced evacuation before it could be re-supplied and manned. Of course, Lincoln used this as a assertation to wage war against the south.....we can talk about that if you want, or we could just go ahead and admit that there is never going to be another civil war like the one we had in the near or immediate future and that this guy is retarded.....

1/5/2009 7:56:02 PM

Quote :

"Good. It is completely absurd to think that we are near secession or dismantlement of the USA...."

Dense. I think this might be the correct word to describe you.

1/5/2009 8:12:47 PM

actually, nm

[Edited on January 5, 2009 at 8:14 PM. Reason : 

1/5/2009 8:13:31 PM

1. I have degrees too! but i learned long ago that education isn't the same as educated
2. i sincerely doubt you make 3x more than me...seriously

anyway, it's hilarious to think that someone can just open fire on union soldiers and it's no biggie

PS...it's the redneck ass flag in your galley that made me call you a redneck

[Edited on January 5, 2009 at 8:31 PM. Reason : .]

1/5/2009 8:17:08 PM

Quote :

"2. i sincerely doubt you make 3x more than me...seriously"

That's so not what he said:

Quote :

"have a job that pays what you hope to make in 3 years"

As you said:

Quote :

"i learned long ago that education isn't the same as educated"

Or, should we chalk that up to reading too quickly and being in a rush to beat down the 'redneck'?

1/5/2009 8:44:54 PM

R. Lee fought for the confederates because his home state succeeded. Had Virginia stayed in the Union, General Lee would have been in command of US forces.

Furthermore, you can try to eloquently satin wrap succession anyway you want, but fact of the matter remains that the south left mainly over slavery. It doesn't matter if you argue that it was for State's rights as I will turn right around and argue that the state has no right to advocate an institution where one man is the physical property of another, and then will proceed to dismantle any other feeble argument you can muster.

The Civil War wouldn't happen again because there isn't any group in this country that has numerical majority in an entire region strong enough to fight for their ideological beliefs and states with predominantly rural populations would last about five hours in a war with anyone simply because they lack infrastructure needed to maintain a modern army.

If the US were to crumble, it would be because populous states like California decided to leave over a major disagreement with the Federal government. A very plausible scenario, actually, if you consider what would have happened had McCain won the election, then subsequently Sarah Palin won 2016.

[Edited on January 5, 2009 at 9:02 PM. Reason : >.<]

1/5/2009 9:01:39 PM

1/5/2009 9:18:03 PM

i know it's pointless, but i can't help myself:

Quote :

"The south, to contrary belief, did not wage war or attack the north in any way."

gettysburg, pa?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gettysburg

1/5/2009 9:37:03 PM

^It's not hard to understand that he was talking about the start of the war. If you could read and comprehend you would understand this.

1/5/2009 10:10:46 PM

Untrue. Forces of the South fired upon military troops of the then U.S. Army first and, in so doing in my mind, destroyed the foundation of American liberalism. Never again would an idiological force democratically bring down the ever expanding federal government.

1/6/2009 12:27:24 AM

Quote :

"Furthermore, you can try to eloquently satin wrap succession anyway you want, but fact of the matter remains that the south left mainly over slavery. It doesn't matter if you argue that it was for State's rights as I will turn right around and argue that the state has no right to advocate an institution where one man is the physical property of another, and then will proceed to dismantle any other feeble argument you can muster."

Sorry, but that is a lie. Slavery was the spark that ignited the powder-keg. Even your "no state has a right to advocate such an institution" is bullshit, because it ignores the feelings at the time, asshat. Looking at it from today's viewpoint is intellectually dishonest.

1/8/2009 9:05:05 AM

They've been saying the same thing about Hall & Oates for years.

1/8/2009 9:53:05 AM

They've been saying the same thing about Hall & Oates for years.

1/8/2009 9:53:05 AM

What the Doobie Brothers broke up???

aw, shit, maaaaaan.

1/8/2009 10:44:54 AM

Quote :

"Sorry, but that is a lie. Slavery was the spark that ignited the powder-keg. Even your "no state has a right to advocate such an institution" is bullshit, because it ignores the feelings at the time, asshat. Looking at it from today's viewpoint is intellectually dishonest. "

What are you even talking about?

1/8/2009 12:25:02 PM

i like all this arguing.

1/8/2009 2:16:58 PM