Don't expect accurate results when your taking political tests from a political activist group.

I guess you're right about this... sadly.

Come to think of it, I can't help but remeber the beginning of Gone with the Wind with those stupid guys who were so anxious and happy that there was gonna be a war. It's sad that people can be so foolish, though I think it's also do to social conditioning (the way boys are raised, and how they're encouraged to be violent, and think of violence as a good thing).

Still, such behaviour makes me not care very much how these crazy war loving people end up. They could end up dead, or multilated or whatever, but I refuse to join their madness.

Your PERSONAL issues Score is 40%

Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 60%

According to your answers, the political group that agrees with you most is...

Centrist prefer a "middle ground" regarding government control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on the issue, they sometimes favor government intervention and sometimes support individual freedom of choice. Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind, tend to oppose "political extremes," and emphasize what they describe as "practical" solutions to problems.

What a terrible quiz lol :P Very biased

The only people who are proud of our country, vote BNP - which is to say, they're bigoted morons. And even anyone who is proud of certain British leaders (including myself) like Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill, Clement Attlee, Henry VIII, Elizabeth I and Victoria, acknowledges that it's been a while since we had anyone that good, and it's unlikely that we'll see anyone that good for quite a while. It's certainly not David "Look how progressive I am" Cameron, Nick "Screw my voters, I have coalition" Clegg or Ed "I swear I'm not a Communist!" Miliband. Maybe Nigel Farage, but he'll never be elected, because he leads a "minor party".

/rant

Firstly, there are magazines with near-naked men on the front cover, so your analogy falls flat.

Secondly, what is difficult about holding a gun and firing it? Yes, they can be heavy. But isn't that a problem for weaker men, and not a problem for stronger women? I'm sure the women serving in the armed forces are much stronger physically than I am. Again, I don't think anybody should be drafted. I just think that if there had to be a draft, it should include all adults.

Why not children? Because children are innocent, and their minds are developing. They don't need to see that kind of thing, or be taught that killing is the right way to solve all of your problems. Also, children actually are too weak to use a gun. Adult women aren't.

@pizzahut451:

LOL, dont use that liberal hippie bullshit on me, its just getting old by now. I knew you were gonna try spinning stuff. The scientific fact remains: Men HAVE bigger physical strenght than women, ther body is NATURALLY better build for war, why the FUCK do you keep denying these facts is beyond me. Thaths not to say that women cant become better warriors than men with a proper training. But pick up an averige man and women on the street and give them equal 6 months combat training and see who gets better results. Men will always edge out and win BECAUSE NATURE SAYS SO ! And even in the stone age(before any kind of civilization even existed), the men were always the ones who went hunting for food (but there are exceptions of course) and the women stayed home with children or whatever. And that has nothing to do with wester civilization at all, but with nature. Oh and you used Africa as your example??? LMFAO XD XD XD !!!! In Africa, they even send children to the war

Yet reality has proven that women can be good warriors (better than men sometimes), if they're allowed the opportunitiy. The example I gave regarding Africa was that of primitive African societies (tribes) which no longer exist, not current-day Africa post-European colonialist rape.

 We just have diffrent opinnions on this subject than. Because i think its a man's duty to defned his people and his land when they are in danger. You think you shouldnt do anything if someone is terrorizing your people and your land as long as it doesnt terrorize you. Fine. Agree to disagree.

If there is actual danger everyone should help with the defending, not just the men. It's sad that society views men as being so expandable (there are actually fewer men than women). Also, there are non-violent ways you can solve conflicts (just look at Ghandi and India).

Maybe because I AM Serbian??? I should abbandon my heritage and orgin just because i moved into another country? Are you kidding me? Seriously now? its because of people like you immigrants usually hate western people and become too proud and start discriminating and insulting western people. You are the cause of your own problem with immigrants.

If you like Serbia and being a Serb so much, then why did you move to Germany?

@Farmageddon:

Only beacause people are like that. The reason is not important, the fact is that you can't assume the world is something it isn't and project the consequecences of a decision (having no army in this cases) on that imaginary world.

But people can change if they want to. It's not some thing part of the natural order of things (like dying) that can't be changed.  I'm not dicouraged by what the world is now, when thinking of what the world should become.

Because things are not that simple, that's the point. You can't just forget about reality and think about your "Plan" on a vacuum or it'll never work, it'd be even worse than doing nothing.

It's not forgeting about reality, it's called doing something. You can't just do nothing and expect things to just magically change. Do you think that that the world just magically changes once in a while? Or is it that some people decide that they won't take things as they are anymore?

It would do better for the other side for whom it works to walk all over you. People prey on weakness. I know you don't like the idea of that, but it's how it is. If you want to change it, you have to first aknowlodge the problem. Just supposing it isn't there because "it doesn't need to be there" won't work at all.

There's a difference between a problem, and a solution. What I want to change is the solution, not deny that there is a problem.

It's not always that simple, the world isn't a perfect Karma zero sum for each individual.

True, but when you play with fire, you may (probably) get burned.

You're missing the point. The institution of the army, the fact that it existis, ins't the fact to hate, but the way it's sometimes used. And they kinda do loose their free will :P

Soldiers don't always know precisely what's going on, but we're having this argument up there already.

I'm so left wing american politicians cant even stand to look at me

I didn't say you were killed if you don't join the army at the point of a gun.  You either join, agree to go to prison or resist (which could with easy lead to the government killing you).

Have you thought about the Free State Project?

I joined the Free State Project a few years ago. Corruption and injustice have gone on for far too long. The time to take power back from big government is now. The Free State Project is an effort to encourage liberty-loving people to unite and solve these problems. We are looking for people from all walks of life, ages, and creeds who think that government exists to protect people’s rights, and should not punish people for activities which interfere with no one else. The success of the Free State Project would mean lower taxes, an expansion of civil liberties, the legalization of victimless crimes, and overall, more freedom. Let’s vote with our feet and create liberty in our lifetime!

http://freestateproject.org/