By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Who do you hate?

forest-spirit on 15 October 2010

I don't hate, I despise, and I despise people who generalise; I despise hypocrits, bad winners, people who find honour in murder, war or beating your wife and kids; and I despise rapists and pedophiles.

There are more things I despise but that's some of them.



Around the Network
Zkuq on 15 October 2010

People that don't make any sense, attention whores, people who are using their position to gain some advantage (most politicians ought to go into this group). Guess that's pretty much all.



yo_john117 on 15 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
yo_john117 said:

Well the way you say it means you should hate politicians, not the military and especially not the people who give their lives for their country.

Don't hate the messenger...hate the message.

Depending on the conflict, most of the time these people aren't giving their lives for their country (at leas the people fighting in Iraq aren't).I also hate the fact tha soldiers rarely ponder why a conflict is going on and if it's even worth fighting in that conflict.

Once again this all boils down to politicians decisions NOT military decisions, why can't you see this?  The military does what they are told to do or they get fired (like any other job)

Not to mention that the military is all about the loss of individuality, the loss of the ability to think critically, obedience, and dehimanisation. How can I not hate that?

The underlined are correct and there is nothing wrong with either of those given the goal of the military.

As for the italicized i'm not sure about that (unless they are actually active duty in a war)

The non underlined one is completely and UTTERLY wrong....to be a soldier you HAVE to think critically to complete your missions.

Seriously please, PLEASE use some common sense and stop hating the messenger.



sapphi_snake on 15 October 2010
yo_john117 said:
sapphi_snake said:

Depending on the conflict, most of the time these people aren't giving their lives for their country (at leas the people fighting in Iraq aren't).I also hate the fact tha soldiers rarely ponder why a conflict is going on and if it's even worth fighting in that conflict.

Once again this all boils down to politicians decisions NOT military decisions, why can't you see this?  The military does what they are told to do or they get fired (like any other job)

Not to mention that the military is all about the loss of individuality, the loss of the ability to think critically, obedience, and dehimanisation. How can I not hate that?

The underlined are correct and there is nothing wrong with either of those given the goal of the military.

As for the italicized i'm not sure about that (unless they are actually active duty in a war)

The non underlined one is completely and UTTERLY wrong....to be a soldier you HAVE to think critically to complete your missions.

Seriously please, PLEASE use some common sense and stop hating the messenger.

You say that "the military does what they are told to do", and then you say that they need to think critically. Critical thinking implies questioning, and in the military you're not supposed to ask questions, you're supposed to follow orders. How many soldiers actually think about whether the conflict they're fighting in justified or not?



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

yo_john117 on 15 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
yo_john117 said:
sapphi_snake said:

Depending on the conflict, most of the time these people aren't giving their lives for their country (at leas the people fighting in Iraq aren't).I also hate the fact tha soldiers rarely ponder why a conflict is going on and if it's even worth fighting in that conflict.

Once again this all boils down to politicians decisions NOT military decisions, why can't you see this?  The military does what they are told to do or they get fired (like any other job)

Not to mention that the military is all about the loss of individuality, the loss of the ability to think critically, obedience, and dehimanisation. How can I not hate that?

The underlined are correct and there is nothing wrong with either of those given the goal of the military.

As for the italicized i'm not sure about that (unless they are actually active duty in a war)

The non underlined one is completely and UTTERLY wrong....to be a soldier you HAVE to think critically to complete your missions.

Seriously please, PLEASE use some common sense and stop hating the messenger.

You say that "the military does what they are told to do", and then you say that they need to think critically. Critical thinking implies questioning, and in the military you're not supposed to ask questions, you're supposed to follow orders. How many soldiers actually think about whether the conflict they're fighting in justified or not?

OMG this is getting out of hand.....point is your hate on the people in the military is completely unjustified and its just so sad.

I'm done here if I keep this stupid debate up i'll end up banned.



Around the Network
melbye on 15 October 2010

People on the extreme right and left in politics

Tobacco-companies

Graphic-whores

Reality stars



kopstudent89 on 15 October 2010

Facebook whores  -omg look at my new album! can u like my pic-oh STFU!

People who will say bull shit just to win an argument no matter what. I really despise that!

Man Utd fans

All extremists

Hypocrites

racists

Britney Spears



Mr Khan on 15 October 2010

1. Rathalos. Screw that guy and the designer who spawned him. One day some guy will be walking home from work at Capcom and be shot with a fireball, then run over by a giant lizard, and justice will be served.

2. Historical Revisionists, especially in the realm of American history. Nothing gets under my skin like people branding Franklin Roosevelt the worst president of all time, or talking about how we shouldn't have fought the civil war, or how the South was somehow justified in what they did.

3. Israel. If that weren't a nation of white people, we'd have bombed them off the face of the earth by now. If a country of non-European descent tried anything like that, it wouldn't fly (which is different from Jews in general. Jews are as varied a religion as Christians or Muslims. Israel abuses its status by trying to wed itself to the religion and try and frame their detractors as anti-semites. It's as bad as Iran who tries to frame their foes as enemies of Islam).

4. Neon Genesis Evangelion. If i had known i could write a random story about incest, orange jello, and butchered Christian mythology, i would have done it. Anyone could have.

5. People who are "chill." I like to get emotional, damnit. A little outrage keeps things moving, and your indignance at my indignance is just going to make me all the more indignant.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

pacman91 on 15 October 2010

Textbook companies

FBS...U.S. WANTS PLAYOFFS. STOP THE BOWL CRAP!

New York Yankees

Cyclops

Superman

 



SamuelRSmith on 15 October 2010
ManusJustus said:
Chairman-Mao said:

Communists - They are the lowest form of life on earth. Share the wealth? What wealth? There is no wealth in communism, just poverty.

I think the Chinese would think differently.

"To get rich is glorious." - Deng Xiaoping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China

If anything, The United States and Western Europe is more communist than anyone else in the world.  China, Vietnam, Moldova, and Nepal (the last two have democratically elected communists in power) all have much higher GINI coefficients than the West.


Eh... isn't the ultimate goal of both free marketeers and command economists less income disparity, in the end? They're just different answers to the same question - how do we make life better for everyone? All the gini coefficient is proving is that the free market (well, closer-to) economies are far closer to achieving their goals than the fully command economies... and, let's be honest, that's neither a coincidence, or surprising.