Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an unofficial archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page or the footnote if you have questions.
 I know why Europeans hate Americans...

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Nov 30, 2001
 Comments:

(paraphrasing Lenny Bruce:)

Because, during World War Two, our grandfathers went over there and fucked their grandmothers for chocolate bars and nylons.
diaries

More diaries by Electric Angst
Bwahahahahaha
Feeling So Real
Damnit!
Well, let's see what happens...
Break My Body, Hold My Bones.
I'm sick. Fuck Off.
I Guess I'm Just a Sick, Sick Bastard.
Damn...
Zippity-do-da
Smile Down on Me
Ow.
Bloody Your Hands on a Cactus Tree...
Oh my Golly!
I Want A Girl With A Mind Like A Diamond
Mister Macho Man, Is It True?
Lust for Life
No L-O-I-T-E-R-I-N-G Allowed
Ever Fallen in Love With Somone You Shouldn't Have Fallen in Love With?
There She Goes...
You're Older Than You've Ever Been. And now You're Even Older.
34 Cent Stamps.
Wish You Were Here
Well...
That girl thinks she's the queen of the neighborhood.
Oh, by the way...
You Know...
-Giving My Goodbye
I'm Gonna Play All Night.
Damn.
Well I'm Just a Modern Guy...
Run Away.
Something in the Way
The Fact That I Adore You is Just One of My Truths.
Play.
It's Over.
Rescindment
Exposition
Extinction
Ho boy I'm Fat!
The funny thing is, trhurler lurks and reads this...
Torn.
World-Wide
The Plan...
Why do I feel good today?
Studies.
Shit I'm Horny!
Damn damn damn.
Good Day
Much and more...
Let the Bible Belt Come and Save My Soul.
A Query.
Ok How I Wish...
Rich Man
Thank Goodness.
DSL
Yule is Coming!
Unfettered Boobies
Here We Go...
Dinner Tonight.
You know...

Reading an interesting article. I could probably write it up and get it on the front page of K5, were K5 up right now. (I'd have to be quick, though, as it'd be important to get a good version out expressing the liberal slant of the article rather than letting one of the right-wing USian cheerleader turn it into simple Euro-bashing.)

That said, I think I'm going to go marine-baiting on SomethingAwful today. I was watching the nightline report on the Northern Alliance's brutality (seems Tom Tomorrow is all wrong about mainstream media) and saw some images of a Northern Alliance soldier beating a prisoner over the head with an AK-47. I also heard the quote "There are no such thing as 'good guys' and 'bad guys' in Afghanistan. There are 'tough guys' and there are 'dead guys'."

Now, on SA, there are a few US Marines who are literally itching for a fight. They're envious of their friends already in Afghanistan, and they're hoping that we end up hitting Iraq, so that they can see combat.

Basically, I want to do a little 'multimedia presentation' on the utter badassness of many of the people those marines would have to fight against. The fact that the Northern Alliance and Taliban soldiers have been fighting longer than those marines have even been alive. Or that the Iraqi army is probably not going to be as willing to surrender now that they've been starving for a decade. Basically, something that compares the current American troops to the British during their imperial era, and points out that they aren't the be-all, end-all of badassness they claim to be...

That will all happen once I get the fucking RedHat 7.2 installed. Sure enough, after downloading and burning CDs all day, and after migrating my file systems to ext3 (meaning I can't just reinstall Mandrake) the installer hung because one of the files on the CD was corrupt. Now it's time to try again...

Wrong (none / 0) (#1)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 07:44:47 AM PST
The real reason is envy.

We want to be the ones kicking third world ass all over the world but you won't let us saying our colonial Empires were bad and replacing them with even worse 'friendly' indigenous regimes.

 
If your goal is controversy, I have a .swf for you (none / 0) (#2)
by theboz on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 09:59:20 AM PST
I've been gathering links for the past two days for an article I am planning to submit to adequacy to show the hypocracy of some of the Christians (the people, not the religion) that visit this site.

One of the links that I thought could help cause a lot of controversy and make people think about things is here. Please note that I am not Muslim, nor of any religion, but I think that people should be more respectful of other's beliefs.
[Reply]

Lessons of tolerance. (1.00 / 1) (#3)
by tkatchev on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 10:17:29 AM PST
OK then, my belief is that you're a fucking moron.

Please respect it, or else.




--
Peace and much love...

 
On a certain level... (2.00 / 1) (#10)
by etherdust on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 01:47:04 PM PST
you have suceeded.

If you can't see the differences between the two "sides," it is you who should do the thinking first.
  • Nuns wearing habits are religious while a muslimah doing the same is oppressed? Because the nuns do so by choice and the muslimah will be killed if they don't (no choice).
  • Jews growing beards are practicing their faith while muslims growing beards are extremists. C'mon. It's not the beard that makes them faitful or extremists, it's their beliefs and how they practice them.
  • Western stay-at-home moms are OK, but muslim women that stay at home "need to be liberated." Again we're back to choice. Western women generally have a choice where for muslim women that is the only thing they are allowed.
I'm not even going to touch the rest because it's much along the same lines.


--
That is all.

Like I said... (none / 0) (#11)
by theboz on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 03:50:58 PM PST
Controversy.

I agree with you on a certain level, but you have to realize these women are not as oppressed as you are led to believe by the media. In some places like Afghanistan, they are/were, but don't confuse Islam with extremists. I don't feel that Jerry Falwell represents Christianity either.

In the article I am working on, the main point is that people shouldn't villify a religion for the bad actions of some of it's followers. This especially shouldn't happen when it's almost an identical religion to their own.

I also think the world needs protection from psycho fundamentalists who want to force everyone else to follow their religion. Whether that's al-Qaeda or anti-choice doctor murderers doesn't make a difference.
[Reply]

humbug (none / 0) (#18)
by nathan on Mon Dec 3rd, 2001 at 06:33:09 PM PST
Falwell is certainly a monstrous human being. Now name me the last person he had publicly executed.

You cultural relativists are the scum of society. Scum.

Nathan

PS - Islam is not "almost identical" to Christianity, any more than alchemy is to chemistry.
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Sweet fucking Allah on a camel (none / 0) (#15)
by zikzak on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 10:47:10 PM PST
Can you say "gratuitous use of an inherently worthless web technology"? Please, for the love of The Prophet, somebody declare Jihad on Flash animations.

Text acrobatics (none / 0) (#16)
by theboz on Sat Dec 1st, 2001 at 07:09:09 AM PST
What's wrong with it? I always figured most people rather enjoyed seeing something they are trying to read flip around, wiggle, then zip around the screen like bumper cars. It makes reading more of a challenge, and more fun. We're in the computer age, when regular text is boring. They could have made it even better if they had used a really nice fancy cursive font with flashing colors and fonts of varying sizes.

Either that, or I'm just a smartass
[Reply]

 
HA! (none / 0) (#4)
by Electric Angst on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 10:47:46 AM PST
I did it! Redhat 7.2 is here, and it's working. (Sure, there are some sound issues, but I can work on that later...)


--
In the dark times, will there still be singing?
Yes, there will be singing. There will be singing about the dark times. -- Bertolt Brecht

 
Yeah yeah (none / 0) (#5)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 11:37:02 AM PST
I strongly suggest you put the words "combined arms force" into a search engine and actually learn about "tactics" and "strategy." Even if every Taliban, NA, and other potential US enemy soldier had been given British SAS, US Navy SEAL and Russian Spetsnaz(sp?) training and passed with flying colors, then fought for 20 years as you(wrongly, since most are relatively recent recruits,) believe every one of them has, and survived unscathed, they still would stand no chance whatsoever against the US, because they don't have air power, they don't have standoff weapons, they don't have satellites or drones or other advanced intelligence equipment, they don't have US logistical capabilities, they don't have US equipment(a few aging Stinger missiles with bad batteries do not count,) they don't have the US' sheer numbers, and contrary to what you heard in the media, we do in fact have large numbers of troops trained in desert and mountain warfare and in the methods used to counter guerilla warfare - and they're the ones who are over there!

In short, anyone we seriously(and seriousness is an important point, as Vietnam illustrated,) decide to take out is going to get taken out. We'll suffer casualties, of course, and in significant numbers, but we'll also win. Whether this is a good idea or not is a completely different question, and not one I'll venture a guess at. However, make no mistake: if we decide to do it, and if we really do it rather than just pussyfoot around, the US military can outright flatten just about anyone, China possibly excepted. Our edge is ridiculous. Remember, "combined arms force." Look it up. Look at what happened historically when conventional ground forces and/or guerillas faced combined arms forces not hamstrung by political sensibilities. They never win. Ever. Not even once, for a moment, or a little bit. Period.

Do you get burns... (none / 0) (#6)
by tkatchev on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 11:58:39 AM PST
...from all the ingratiating hot air you blow?


--
Peace and much love...

 
"baddassness" (none / 0) (#7)
by ucblockhead on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 12:02:45 PM PST
Being "tough" isn't everything. Technology tends to trump "tough". The Pacific War in WWII was an obvious example. The Imperial Japanese military outdid the Afghans in toughness and willingness to die, but that was not enough to overcome American technology and productivity.

I'd be careful about pumping up the Iraqi army if I were you. Before the original Gulf War, the TV screens and pundit columns were full of people hand-wringing about the potential for massive casualties, how well the Iraqis were dug in, how good their morale was, etc, etc,.




Hrm... (none / 0) (#8)
by Electric Angst on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 12:14:08 PM PST
Well, I'm not saying that we're gonna get our asses kicked. I just wanted to deflate the macho posturing of the marines in question.

As I can tell from some of the responces I've already received, I know I'll have to include something like "Of course, we have better technology, but that technology is very complex, and a majority of it is operated by people with barely more than a high school education." That'll really steam 'em...


--
In the dark times, will there still be singing?
Yes, there will be singing. There will be singing about the dark times. -- Bertolt Brecht

Do you realize... (none / 0) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 04:00:18 PM PST
that that technology is BUILT to be operated by those barely educated people? I mean, seriously, if you actually got to look at it, even our nuclear weapons, while heavily safeguarded, are quite simple to actually use once you have the appropriate authorization. A child of ordinary capability could do it. Many video games are harder. This is to say nothing of the utter simplicity of things like, say, precision guided weapons, where some officer targets them in advance(GPS) and/or they're targetted automatically based on imaging and so on. You just fly over, push the button, and boom. And that's all done by officers, who have much more education. Your problem is that you're criticizing something you know next to nothing about. Even if you knew more, you might still be critical, but as it is, you're just yabbing. You might piss off some by-their-nature hotheaded marines, but so what? You could do that by calling them flaming fags with a lot less work...

Ah Ha! (none / 0) (#13)
by Electric Angst on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 05:41:16 PM PST
That's even better.

"You're only able to win because you were handed these toys, toys who'd design had to be dumbed down to make sure you could use it." At that point it could go on with how if it wasn't for technology designed by the very ype of people who don't even like the armed forces, and if they were just fighting AK-47 to M-16, than the much more toughened Afghani forces would be whipping thier ass.

That actually accomplishes my goal much better than what I as planning on previously. You see, these guys are essentially promoting a view of manhood and masculinity that revolves around being physically strong, and able to kill/defeat our enemies. That's a very negative view (although our ability as a nation to have a strong defence force is important), and one who's absurdity I'm attempting to make clear.


--
In the dark times, will there still be singing?
Yes, there will be singing. There will be singing about the dark times. -- Bertolt Brecht

It seems to make them all the more courageous. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by elenchos on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 06:44:42 PM PST
Their eagerness to fight in spite of the legendary fearsomeness of the Afghan warriors (as attested by our own Angry Russian) just goes to show how brave our young Marines are, doesn't it? And what about the well-known unreliabilty of our untested technology in actual field conditions? And if they were weenies who just wanted to hide behind high-tech gadgets instead of getting up in the enemy's face, why didn't they join the Air Force?

Maybe you could try mentioning that the Corps sent their "A" units over there already, and the reason those boys were left behind to post flames on the Inter-Net instead of fighting is because the the Corps knows that they are nothing but a lot of homos and girly men who aren't worth a damn. When we invade Iraq, they'll probably get left behind then too, seeing as they suck so much at everything except playing Quake and surfing for gay porn.

Probably the best chance for them to see any action would be to steal the nail polish of the guy in the next bunk, or get a job doing security at an N'Sync show. Obviously their own officers don't think they can really fight.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

 
Oh? (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 3rd, 2001 at 10:35:36 AM PST
At a guess, I'd say typical US Marines would outfight your Afghan friends even using comparable equipment. They wouldn't be sent without mountain and irregular tactics training, and their general level of training and the quality of the techniques they are taught is second to none. You could mock them for being soldiers of the wealthiest, most powerful nation in the world, with the best gear, training, and so on, but somehow I am not certain they'd be upset by this.
<BR><BR>
Have you considered just calling them limp wristed homos and getting on with your life?
<BR><BR>
By the way, the reason they're itching to go and all gung ho and convinced they're invincible is that this is precisely what the Corps wants them to feel. This way, they're actually "effective" when they do have to fight. That's half the difference between the Marines(who usually win fights when outnumbered 2-1, even without fancy technology,) and the Army(which is still quite good, but not nearly Marine-esque.) The trick is, many of them have to die for it to work. At the tender age of 18, they really can't be taught the subtleties of the reality of their situation without preventing them from being effective in the face of that mortality problem, so their egos are built up like mad. Why not? It works, after all, and those who survive do in fact learn the truth anyway - and are actually often even more effective for having learned it that way.

 
It might help you to know... (none / 0) (#9)
by because it isnt on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 01:08:42 PM PST
that ext3 is ext2. You can mount it as either ext2 or ext3. So you can go back to Mandrake without having to 'convert back' to ext2.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.