wellOriginally Posted by faesce
well
shut up faggots
Hello, captain castle !
We are proud to introduce our RxMedPro Internet Pharmacy
We offer a wide selection of popular generic medications including Viagra, Cialis, Propecia, Zithromax, Soma, Amoxil and many more. Our online pharmacy is the most reliable medication provider for prescription drugs without a prescription. We sell exact generic equivalents of US FDA approved medications through our licensed overseas pharmacy. All of our products are as effective as any other brand name meds, since they are equally safe and reliable.
Leading since 2004
RxMedPro.com has earned the trust of tens of thousands of customers by providing reliable customer service since 2004. The confidentiality and welfare of our patients is paramount. From your initial online order or phone call, straight through to the delivery or pick-up of your product, your privacy is of the highest importance. Our billing and shipping is performed as discreetly as possible, and RxMedPro will never sell or give your details to outside companies. Nor do we contact you unless absolutely necessary. We intend to uphold the standards of a doctor/patient relationship with all of our online customers, meaning confidentiality is guaranteed.
Efficiency & Reliability
Since opening for business in 2004, RxMedPro has continued to refine and develop our business practices, so that today we are the most efficient and reliable company of its type in the world. We purchase our medications from the largest drug wholesalers in the world, which means you receive quality prescription medications. Our online questionnaires were devised by our physicians, which means RxMedPro gathers all the relevant health/medical information that is necessary for our physicians to determine what is in the best interest of your health.
Bonuses & Discounts
We offer free Standard Airmail Service for all orders for more than $150. We value our customers and this is the way we can express our gratitude.
You are guaranteed to get a 5% discount on your second order and 7% discount on your third and further orders.
You can get up to a 10 % discount on your next purchase if you tell your friends about our site.
Best regards,
www.rxmedpro.com
I also wonder what would it take to have "Darth Vader" accept the Iranian ability to possess nuclear weapons as a sovereign state. Would Iranian nuclear possession be a-okay if the despotic Shah were in power? Lord knows people like Shariati and others who wanted to take the Iranian Revolution into a more... socialist direction would not do the trick.
I know that nothing short of the DPRK abandoning socialism would make nuclear possession not a horrendous event in the history of mankind in your view.
it wouldn't be okay if the shah were in power because his role was as a US-endorsed leader. if we didn't want him to have nukes, he wouldn't have them. his job was to watch out for those goddamned soviets
but also this whole concept of nation-states is new and dumb. superpowers have always dictated who gets to do what all the time
fantasy fluff is terrible you should read good epics
steven erikson is a good start
i heard tell that homer wrote a bestselling epic or two.
PANDAS
If you don't like them, then get the fuck out.
who the hell is horner
some blind greek
possible homersexual
PANDAS
If you don't like them, then get the fuck out.
hahaha i confused r and n with m halp i am apparently dyslexic
This thread isn’t BAD per say, its just in a bad place. And yes, there are those who could argue that its not even in a bad place, and hell I’ll give them credit and say they could argue it successfully. At the same time, even those who are most extreme in their arguments against the “bad place” theory for this thread could not argue that we are not in a GOOD place.
Lets compromise for a second, and agree that we are not in a GOOD place, but not necessarily in a BAD place.
That leaves us with the middle path. Average. Plain.
I submit, is it a forum worth posting in if every thread is steeped in mediocrity?
what the fuck are you talking about?
rep+
and lol
I realize now a lot of people probably didn't reach the end of the OP, and don't know that I C&P that.
I'm still lost
people gotta read more
In the past five days, just as many people have told me that they feel the end of the world is approaching. I say that the promoters of 2012 are doing their job a little too well.
Not even the Mayans believe the world is gonna end in 2012
People need to shut the fuck up
I actually saw a thing on the History channel about that. 2012 is when the Mayan calender ended. Most researchers believe they reset their calender every few thousand years. Then again, the H-Channel also has the Nostrodomas Effect so you know their accuracy can't be too trustworthy.
no no, it's a rollover of the clock. it marks the beginning of the 13th baktun or something like that, and it might be (i'm a little hazy on this) the end of the duration of the short-count calendar, but it's still just a rollever. Hitting the year 2000 doesn't mean the world is going to end, and getting 200000km on your car doesn't mean it's going to blow up. I think the long-count was something like 13.0.0.0.0.0 with, roughly, the 0s being thousands (they have a base-20 system for counting), set to start at a certain time with the stars at a certain alignment, but this is all from memory of reading a couple articles 2 or 3 years ago.
yeah 2012 was just a huge deal because it was essentially a new millenium for the mayans, and the media and morons have blown it out of proportion
I trust everything this man says.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." -Anne Frank
“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.” -Buddha
Identity
Since people apparently think I'm a reactionary or something, I figure I might as well respond to the first post.
Yes.Well, to start it off simply, the entire World has gone to hell, and is currently roasting medium well in a nice little corner so remote that barely anyone realizes it.
Capitalism is degenerating, yes.If you’ve opened a newspaper recently, you’ve obviously been swamped with the most disturbing, openly balls out retarded articles you’ve ever read. This isn’t an isolated thing. This is the entire world falling apart, and no one has the balls to do anything about it.
The state is merely a tool of class rule. The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is to be replaced with the dictatorship of the proletariat. To advocate the defense of the state right now is to both uphold the current degenerate bourgeois system and also makes one a reactionary.Well. My first point is the whole equal rights argument. NOT ALL PEOPLE ARE EQUAL. Some people just shouldn’t be given rights. Anarchists for example, should be treated more suspect than the average person. Those who actively work to undermine the government should be treated as terrorists, and charged as such.
I disagree. The UN has done an admirable job of kicking out progressive leaders and promoting the status-quo. Does Lumumba and the Congo Crisis ring a bell? Or more recently, the UN occupation of Haiti (which is still continuing) after the fall of Aristide, or the undermining of the Sudanese government to appease imperialist interests.The UN is a failure. This is why I am a self proclaimed Revanchist. I can list so many times that the UN has failed at doing its job in the last 20 years that it would make Santa Clause cry himself into a drunken stupor.
... is another aspect of UN intervention in the affairs of a soverign and non-aggressive country. It isn't nice when only pro-US states get the bomb, you know.North Korea’s nuclear program.
The US never sold guns illegally, apparently. Someone better ask the paramilitaries of Colombia, or the hundreds of Cold War groups. Ever heard of the Contras? Imperialist states sending guns to a group in order to gain influence over it is nothing new, as the Cold War has taught us. This is why imperialism, which is itself an essential part of capitalism, is to be eradicated.Russia illegally selling weapons across the globe.
See the DPRK above. I'll advocate an end to Iran's nuclear program once a worldwide nuclear disarmament begins. Until then, no dice.Iran going Nuclear.
We invaded a progressive country that wasn't fond of the US (because it interfered with Kuwait; a totally useless state that had no basis except to separate it and its vast oil fields from Iraq) and are now witnessing the retaliation of the people of that state.The US invading Iraq (I’m a proud American patriot and I will be the first to admit that our country SCREWED UP with that whole mess. We managed to turn a stable (well…relatively stable anyway) shithole into a complete blunderfuck in about 5 years.
The "peacekeeping" aspect works as a nice cover for imperialism, which is its purpose.The peacekeeping aspect of the UN fails miserably
This is coming from someone who thinks that anyone who undermines an apparently glorious state (just somehow suffers from spontaneous shittiness) should be arrested.Abortion. Do people honestly think that they have a right to tell a woman what she can and can’t do with her body? These are usually the same people who want to proudly march us into the tenth century. I’m not exaggerating when I say that half of these people are complete nut jobs who masturbate FURIOUSLY to all things right winged while loading their rifles and waving their American flags on the warpath to the nearest liberals house. God forbid gays should ever have equal rights, for fear that they will actively seek to destroy America next, and from there the entire world!
Those Communists and Anarchists you're condemning also support the right to bear arms.Now don’t get me wrong, I do not by any means dislike conservatives, hell, I have quite a few conservative tendencies myself. I think the whole liberal vs conservative thing is the most retarded thing to happen since the movie Superbad. When it comes to the Right to Bear Arms, I can safely say that I take the "Molon Labe" stance on this issue. Our constitution DECLARES us the right to have guns, and anyone who thinks gun control is a good idea is WILLFULLY IGNORANT of the standing statistics and should be SHOT, just for the ironic enjoyment of the rest of us.
I'd say the problem is putting social catagories over economic ones. Scientific analyses and classifications such as bourgeoisie, petty-bourgeoisie, proletariat and lumpenproletariat are purposely ignored in favor of "GAY RIGHTS APPEASER" or whatever.That’s one of the major flaws with American society as I see it, we focus too much on labeling and categorizing each other. In the eyes of an overconservative, if you support gay rights or abortion you’re a hippie liberal commie who needs to be shot for ruining this country. In the eyes of an overliberal, if you DON’T support gay rights or abortion you’re a stingy, old fashioned bigoted bastard who is ruining this country.
Bourgeois "democracy" cannot operate without the nominal competition between the "left" and "right."The liberals, or the “left wing” think that this eagle will fly better without its right wing altogether.
The conservatives, or “right wing” think that this eagle would fly better without its left wing altogether.
You advocate reformism. Yawn. Even though you may hate him, you're basically taking the Michael Moore position. "Shit sucks, but hey, this is AMERICA! AMERICA THE GREAT! WE CAN REBUILD IT AND CREATE GLORY!"I AM advocating bringing down the obsolete, out of date, and useless trends in this country stone by stone and using what we already have to work with to put it back, but better.
Politicians are simply representatives of the bourgeoisie.The problem with this, however, is that it requires hard work, effort, and money from the politicians pockets. This is a terrible sin to anyone who has ever held office or a position of power, and as such, will most likely never happen.
It leaves us with capitalism, and apparently you want to keep the imperialism, the capitalism, and yet at this same time you want to "revitalize" the country. But then you're just being a utopian.That leaves us with the middle path. Average. Plain.
lol +rep
lik dis if u cry evertim
Still waiting for an answer.
The point is how hypocritical it was that pro-US states do have nuclear weapons, but when states that no imperialist power likes attain them, it's a mortal sin against ad hoc international law or something.it wouldn't be okay if the shah were in power because his role was as a US-endorsed leader. if we didn't want him to have nukes, he wouldn't have them. his job was to watch out for those goddamned soviets
mrdie this is dumb i think the US, france, the UK, germany, china and russia should have a free-for-all on who gets to occupy what land
we call canada and the philippines
this competition is boring.
does "Nuclear armed B2" give you a hint at the outcome?
Last edited by Darth Vader; 10-19-2009 at 04:37 PM.
Death by black hole sounds kinky.
god i want to bone neil degrasse and i thought obama was the only darkie i'd tap
Wasn't that guy on John Stewart? As I recall it was a really cool interview
He hosts the show Nova ScienceNow, acclaimed writer, member of the NSF, brilliant beyond all scope of the word and has a great personality. He's been on everything.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." -Anne Frank
“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.” -Buddha
Identity
as well as a mustache that sole wants to cover with her girl goo.
hey wuddabout me you skank
Last edited by sycld; 10-20-2009 at 01:39 PM.
PANDAS
If you don't like them, then get the fuck out.
You're confusing intelligent policy with hypocritical policy because you don't like it.
I realize that because you do not understand cost-benefit analysis because you are an idiotic communist that this will be completely foreign to you, but in the real world, we assess the costs and benefits of everything we do.
If we have all of the world's nukes, there is a benefit to us (we can use them, you can't.) There is also a cost (no one else trusts us because we might use nukes on them.)
The benefit of sharing the nukes with the people we trust will not use them against us is that countries we don't trust will try to convince us to trust them and provide them with nukes. The cost is that faggot fundamentalist conspiracy theorists will use their relgion to convince their following that we are conspiring against them and that they must rise against us and obtain nukes as quickly as possible.
The benefit of giving nukes to everyone is that no one hates us for not sharing our nukes. The cost is that, oh wait, people already didn't like us in the first place and we just gave them fucking nukes.
I was never advocating that the US give nukes to anyone. The DPRK is a sovereign state pursuing its own nuclear program. I believe in nuclear disarmament, but only on an equal basis, and that requires an international disarmament; based on all states disarming.I realize that because you do not understand cost-benefit analysis because...
Since this is obviously impossible under imperialism, the DPRK should be able to pursue a nuclear path towards peace, since it does not deserve to be bullied by an imperialist power which could threaten it with nuclear retaliation.
I know what cost-benefit analysis is, it just isn't really relevant here because I'm describing imperialism against a state attaining nuclear arms, and while there is most certainly cost-benefit analysis in imperialism, I am discussing the US' denial of the the DPRK's ability to pursue nuclear arms independently of US wishes. It would obviously not be in the US' best interest for the DPRK to attain nuclear power, in which case I say: good, let the DPRK roar.
So basically you just attacked me on something I was never advocating and are assuming that I am ignorant about a policy I know full well about because "Hurr Communists don't know anything."
Yes, giving nuclear power to allied states so that they can exert pressure upon anti-US states is a wise policy for US imperialism to pursue. Thank you for that brilliant insight. It's still hypocritical that damnations are being elongated every time the DPRK tests its nuclear capabilities, whereas imperialist states possess these same weapons (better quality, actually) yet the anti-communist "left" of these countries and in the US itself says nothing and instead joins the choir of voices against the DPRK. It is also hypocritical because the attainment of nuclear power by the DPRK is being lambasted as a danger to nuclear non-proliferation by some liberal circles.You're confusing intelligent policy with hypocritical policy because you don't like it.
Last edited by Husein; 10-22-2009 at 04:17 PM.
Mrdie, explain to me why America ruling the world with a big stick is a bad thing
go
Because the US, like other imperialist powers in the past, is an exploitative power. Like all capitalist states, it is to be opposed in order to further humanity and to achieve socialism on a worldwide basis.
In the US itself, a labor aristocracy is developed, as the bourgeoisie bribe the workers and to convert them into reformists at best. This has been noted by Lenin, and by other Marxists such as Sultan-Galiev, Lin Biao, and even Marx and Engels to an extent.
In his 1980 work Eurocommunism is Anti-Communism, Enver Hoxha explains this process in Western Europe:
So the destruction of imperialism (which is, as Lenin noted, the highest stage of capitalism) also brings forth the rise of socialism as bourgeois regimes propped up by imperialist aid topple and the formerly imperialist state is itself deprived of valuable markets in which it can keep itself alive.The development of the economy in the West after the war also exerted a great influence on the spread of opportunist and revisionist ideas in the communist parties. True, Western Europe was devastated by the war but its recovery was carried out relatively quickly. The American capital which poured into Europe through the "Marshall Plan" made it possible to reconstruct the factories, plants, transport and agriculture so that their production extended rapidly. This development opened up many jobs and for a long period, not only absorbed all the free labour force but even created a certain shortage of labour.
This situation, which brought the bourgeoisie great superprofits, allowed it to loosen its pursestrings a little and soften the labour conflicts to some degree. In the social field, in such matters as social insurance, health, education, labour legislation etc., it took some measures for which the working class had fought hard. The obvious improvement of the standard of living of the working people in comparison with that of the time of the war and even before the war, the rapid growth of production, which came as a result of the reconstruction of industry and agriculture and the beginning of the technical and scientific revolution, and the full employment of the work force, opened the way to the flowering amongst the unformed opportunist element of views about the development of capitalism without class conflicts, about its ability to avoid crises, the elimination of the phenomenon of unemployment etc. That major teaching of Marxism-Leninism, that the periods of peaceful development of capitalism becomes a source for the spread of opportunism, was confirmed once again. The new stratum of the worker aristocracy, which increased considerably during this period, began to exert an ever more negative influence in the ranks of the parties and their leaderships by introducing reformist and opportunist views and ideas.
Under pressure of these circumstances, the programs of these communist parties were reduced more and more to democratic and reformist minimum programs, while the idea of the revolution and socialism became ever more remote. The major strategy of the revolutionary transformation of society gave way to the minor strategy about current problems of the day which was absolutized and became the general political and ideological line.
Last edited by Husein; 10-25-2009 at 04:38 AM.
out of curioisty, how many social based doctorates/degrees do you have that make you authorised to say you are more intelligent then 99.99999% of the worlds social scientists?
30 degrees? 40? By god with all the doctorates you must have you should be making hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Why is this relevant to my words on the workings of imperialism?
America "ruling the world with a big stick" is imperialism.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks