Recent posts by thepunisher52 on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should we relax marriage laws even further?

Originally posted by stanwise:

Works for me!

Ideally, we’d leave marriage to clerics, and let each religious sect decide for itself who it will or won’t marry.

Government would be solely in the business of forming civil units, which would be composed of any number of consenting adults of any gender who have chosen to pool their finances, legal affairs, households, and lives together. These civil units would then get the legal protections currently afforded to marriage, such as joint tax returns, family health insurance plans, hospital visitation rights, and so on. The paperwork would undoubtedly be more complicated, but I hear computers are pretty complex themselves these days.

How does that sound?


Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Types of crazy illegal things teenagers do

petty hooliganism is not a serious thing but should be discouraged lest it changes it into something else.

Every young lad has his reckoning, either at the hands of the law or by someone far meaner than them. God knows I had mine. It was a good thing, straightened me up, told me who my real friends are and relativity of values.


Topic: Serious Discussion / Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex Issue

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex Issue

If I look into my heart, I find no sympathy for these people because there are causes far worthy than this PC Bullshit.
I don’t give a shit if you are a lumber jack who fancies himself a woman or a petite thinking of herself as a man.
There are wars famines, floods and many more things that preoccupy me.
Such bullshit causes as LGBT or "gender Identity are for rich snobs who have too much time on their hands.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by jhco50:

If Hitler won, you would be speaking German right now.

Yeah and he would have taken mah guns.
and would have killed me for loving man buns.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Do you agree with this quote? "History is written by the victors" - Winston Churchill

Originally posted by spookyskeleton:

There is debate if he said this..but do you agree with this quote??

“History is written by the victors” – Winston Churchill

That is the very reason we consider nazis evil.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Identical Universe survival.

What you are saying is basically starting over with the benefit of hindsight and many choices that were not there first time around.
I’d love that

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:

Well, even if that project has been completed, it would have been a short lived one for the moment they would start shelling, they would give their location away and will become targets to air raids.

They already were targets. But, in a war economy, the concept is quietly brilliant, because you could fill the shells with scrap metal or concrete instead of explosive and it would be just as destructive, precisely because the shell is a solid mass travelling at multiple times the speed of sound when it hits. The shell essentially atomises, and everything around it does too. It’s brilliant for a time when actual munitions are perhaps scarce, allowing the explosives you’re making to go direct to the front, and basically enabling you to fling the rubble of bombed out buildings at your enemy in shell form.

It wouldn’t have been feasable at that time to stop such a shell. You put up barrage balloons, and the shot just goes straight through them, and the resulting cloud of projectiles still smacks the target with practically the same force as the original lump. Heck, in theory it could go through a building in front of the target, and still strike its target with lethal force, dumping obscene amounts of kinetic energy into the ground at the target location.

Once you switched on, you could pretty much just keep on firing. Fling shell after shell after shell without stopping. Sortof like a machine gun designed to take down cities.

It doesn’t really matter that you’ve given away your location when when you’re lobbing that kind of inert firepower. By the time their bomber squadrons reach you, you’ve reduced the bases they came from, to rubble.

Good point in theory but there is a reason that no noe has tried it after the germans (no one but gun totting muricans’)
But the priciple you are talking about is the same they are using for the space crowbars.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Another fun weapon the Germans had was the V3, a mixture of fuel propellant and magnetically accelerated projectile. Used a 2km long magnetic accelerator rail to launch at high mach speeds. Basically a railgun for warship shell-sized projectiles.

The Germans never got to use the V3, because the Allies bombed the two partially complete launching rails into the ground towards the end of the war. In a different war where the Germans were still holding their own, the V3 would definitely have broken the back of allied resistance.

Well, even if that project has been completed, it would have been a short lived one for the moment they would start shelling, they would give their location away and will become targets to air raids.
Saddam was also thinking of such a thing but his chief engineer died in mysterious circumstances.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What if Hitler won WW2???????

Originally posted by James146:

@vikaTae, what is the difference (in power) between the atomic bomb and that weapon you mentioned?

Also, I don’t think they would relax their grip, but rather the opposite. Germans would feel proud and feel like their form of government is the best, since it took them out of the Great Depression.

They might enter a war with the remainder of the world (Aryan race and stuff like that), but that wouldn’t matter much would it?

Atomic bomb was a bomb that is it had to be dropped by a plane because american technology was not yet advanced enough to make long range missiles to deliver atomic war heads via a missile. While Silbevogel was a delivery system
that is , it was more ike a very long ranged bomber which could hit america from germany.

Speking of german weaponry, they were the first to make guided glide bombs too.

Edit: I see vika has already replied.

Similar story with U-boat launched V2s. They each carry a one tonne payload of anything, and have an operational range once fired of about two thousand miles. The sub surfaces, fires the missiles (a prototype which worked of the submarine firing system was built before the end of the war) and rinks again. The missiles go up near-vertically, reach the edge of space, and fall back down at a steep angle, and incredible speed compared to anything available at the time.

This is what pakistan is trying to achieve(or has already achieved, i’ll have to recheck), only with nuclear weapons. The idea behind it is that if for some reason our land based Nukes are unoperable incase of an invasion, we should still be able to launch from sea.


Topic: Serious Discussion / What would Obama look like in a future U.S History Textbook?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator

Topic: Serious Discussion / What would Obama look like in a future U.S History Textbook?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Identical Universe survival.

I will start my career in bank robbery

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Of Awful Parents

Nobody? This place is full of happy go luck marshmallow chumping rich pricks


Topic: Serious Discussion / Of Awful Parents

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Choose a Faction

Originally posted by DarylDixon101:

Erudite, Abnegation, Amity, Dauntless or Candor
(Don’t know the meanings, look it up)
If you had to leave your family forever and keep to one group of people what would it be and why?
I belong to Amity in real life, on here people might say Dauntless….
Or factionless…. likley the latter.
However, you might be something much more than any of those.
Does anybody belong to just one? Maybe you might be Divergent.
Post your opinion and where you believe you belong!

This is bullshit teenage love story crap


Topic: Serious Discussion / How old do you want to be when you die?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American Conservatism versus the world.

Originally posted by jhco50:

Of course it was Vika, quartering troops in private homes, confiscating weapons, raping women, etc had noting to add to it, right? Maybe you should read your history and stop picking just what you want out of it.

Hyperbole much?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How old do you want to be when you die?

65 will be good enough, assuming my hot head does not end it earlier.


Topic: Serious Discussion / Sing with me .....

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / child dies after overdosing on parent's "medicinal" weed

mein Führer, was ist Ihr Befehl?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Give me your tired, your poor

Originally posted by Pleasedonot5:

Let me present you all with a pertinent scenario. Suppose we are both firefighters and neighbors to a burning building, responding to a wave of destructive fire that is spreading to our homes and loved ones. Do we spend our precious and scarce resource, water, continuously and separately on the flames approaching our respective homes? Or, do we focus our efforts on actually solving the problem, the burning building, through sharing our resources?

Clearly, the scenario is rhetorical and the latter is the more practical means of solving the problem for everyone. The metaphor teaches us that, unless we focus our efforts on the source of a propagating problem, the problem will continue. Accordingly, we should prioritize the causes of the unmanageable influxes of immigration, instead of simply responding to the immigration policies of our own countries. This means prioritizing the end of the wars causing the immigration by any moral means necessary. The problem, if we all accept this ideology, is exactly how to do it.

Well, ideally, we would have a world organization of countries that has the power to pass world-wide legislation and place peacekeeping forces in the midst of troublesome countries. Ideally, we would call this organization the United Nations, and they would have international regulating power.

Okay, so clearly we have such an organization, but the problem remains. This, I would argue, is largely due to countries’ lack of participation in resolving global conflicts. Although there are U.N. and other peacekeeping forces (such as NATO), these are headed by the United States which contributes way more than any other UN country to the peacekeeping forces, and a vast super-majority of troops to NATO peacekeeping forces, which hints at the rest of the world’s lack of willingness to contribute.

The lack of faith in the U.N.‘s peacekeeping potential is also present in the lack of troops provided by the key U.N. members. This lack of faith is dangerous, and a main reason why the first international political regulating organization, the League of Nations, failed to work together to prevent WWII. Ideally, the world would invest more in U.N.’s peacekeeping potential and, together, would physically prevent the wars from continuing; an organization has more political power if it is supported by all nations of the world, rather than three or four. As a developed world, it is essential for us to come to the realization that war is regressive, morally wrong, and only justified in self-defense (if everyone operated on this principle, there would be no war; there would be no aggressor) and to work together as a globalized society to stopping war and genocide anywhere it appears on the globe. This would prevent the influxes of refugees, keep unemployment steady in immigrant-accepting countries, and would increase the quality of life for everyone on the globe.

Fire extinguished.

UNO is puppetof the west and its only function is to forward the agenda of western especially USA.
The only good thing, the ONLY good thing abut UNO is that it is a source of revenue for our army. (for we contribute “peace keepers”)

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American Shame: My Lai Massacre

Originally posted by petesahooligan:

The military is certainly not the only agency responsible for atrocities. Companies are also involved from time to time.

Here’s a little-known entry in American history; the Ludlow Massacre.

In the early 1900s the west was going nuts with lumber and mining. The companies involved were buying, leasing, or just outright squatting huge tracts of land and pulling out as much timber and coal they could get their hands on. These resources basically materialized the western expansion, not to mention a fatten a few wallets.

Workers Unions had already been established as the most effective bargaining liaisons for workers subjected to the arbitrary and (often) unfair practices and policies of large corporations. In mining towns it was common for housing, commerce, entertainment, and all aspects of the workers’ lives to be supplied by the corporation. This is where the term “company store” comes from… the worker gets his or her paycheck then walks over to the grocery for food, marked up to exorbitant profits, and those profits are returned to the corporation. Same with housing. Even tools and medical services were sometimes “offered” by the corporation. Outside companies were prevented from doing business by company goons… “town security” (also in thrall of the corporation).

In Ludlow, Colorado the miners had enough as went on strike. In retaliation, the company (Colorado Fuel and Iron, a Rockefeller company), killed over 20 people… some women and children. The workers retaliated and in the ensuing fight 50 people were killed.

The workers were asking for, among other things, an 8-hour work day and the right to use _any_store, doctor, or housing.

The National Guard was called in to restore order. The resulting arrests led to 332 workers being indicted for murder but only one man, the leader of the strike, was convicted and that sentence was later overturned. Essentially nobody served any time for any crime.

There’s a memorial on the site now.

We have a quote in fasrsi
“Tang Amad Bajang Amad”
It roughly (*Very Very Roughly)translates to
“Shit hits the fan if not disposed in timely manner”

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Torture, Its Legality and its effectiveness,

Lets talk about its effectiveness.
I don’t think its very effective.
I mean if I am being hit in the cojones with a hammer, i would say anything to make it stop.
Wouldn’t I?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Anyone got experience with wills and probate (uk law)?

Originally posted by donseptico:

Ok, long version cut short, my brother’s landlady has recently died and had originally willed the property to him and his wife (in light of the amount of work he did on it at her behest) but changed her will ‘at the last minute’ when staying away with her family.

Obviously, it’s her right to leave it to whomever, but…

a) where would he stand making a claim against the estate for ongoing japanese knowteed management, etc?

b) what, if anything, can he do about his new landlord wanting to raise his rent contrary to the stated wishes of the decedent.

(obviously I’ve told him to get proper legal advice – but that’s easier said than done for multiple reasons, not least of which being money… so if anyone has experience in this area?

I will tell you from my ACCA Book
There is one thing called past consideration in contract law and it is also applicable on wills and death estate as far as I can tell.
Basically, if you do something with out any promise of payment in advance, a promise made after the deed is done is un enforceable.
The closest case study I could find online was this:

Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Court of Appeal

Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband’s father who had died leaving the property to his wife for life and then on trust for Majorie’s husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made.


The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid

Basically, unless you have a proof that she agreed before hand about this property transfer, you are as you pale buggers say “Shite out of luck mate.”

Just my two cents.