Best gif/debate thrad ever! [Archive]

WhoIsYou

09-30-2009, 08:23 PM

It is the most powerful position in the world though...keep that in mind.
Says the US?
Yet they can't really do anything in any other country but their own.

WIY would beg to differ. He is god.

(I don't believe him either)

Nope, I'm not.

no it isnt.........
This

Quite true indeed..
IF you have a girl who's fallacious intentions, have you by the
bawls, you know when to back down from an argument, knowing what the
outcome will be.. That's right, no Nob-Slob for YOU tonight.. lol
Lrn2cook

Woman can't get power because they can't handle it, it's a fact of life, you give them money, they'll spend it, you teach her to fish, she goes to Long John Silvers.

I lol'd

SmExY_AsHLeY

09-30-2009, 09:43 PM

damn well i agree with IRu that is so true and women can handle power. for example i am cb mod and i never abuse my powers in the cb. also i am very good with money i dont go out and just buy things with it. Not every woman is like that. Also woman have become a lot more powerful in the past couple of years. Sex is what runs a mans mind. You guys think about that alot. Woman on the other hand have better intentions.

Pain_ELementaL

09-30-2009, 10:40 PM

Says the US?
Yet they can't really do anything in any other country but their own.

Do some research before making your typical prejudiced posts. You don't know anything about world government and international laws, so don't act like you do idiot.

BLack_OpsKiLLa

09-30-2009, 10:42 PM

Fighting Terrorism is like fighting with a blind fold on. =(

Pain_ELementaL

09-30-2009, 10:43 PM

no it isnt.........

And you as well, do some research. I'm not being biased as an American, it's a fact. Stop being ignorant.

BLack_OpsKiLLa

09-30-2009, 11:28 PM

Every other country respects the president of the united states that we have good relations with. The US does have power over other countrys. We have turned allot of other countrys into democracys. But terrorism is another story. =)

WhoIsYou

09-30-2009, 11:43 PM

Do some research before making your typical prejudiced posts. You don't know anything about world government and international laws, so don't act like you do idiot.

Lol, and yeah I'm the idiot? How was that a 'typical prejudiced post' ?
Maybe you should do some research. Being president of the US gives you no power anywhere... He can't go to say... Australia and tell some person to get on the floor so he can walk on them.

BLack_OpsKiLLa

09-30-2009, 11:46 PM

The president can deploy the armed forces for 90 days with out consulting congress. That's over 15 million people he controls

SmExY_AsHLeY

09-30-2009, 11:46 PM

The president can deploy the armed forces for 90 days with out consulting congress. That's over 15 million people he controls

this is true owned wyi

Pain_ELementaL

09-30-2009, 11:47 PM

Lol, and yeah I'm the idiot? How was that a 'typical prejudiced post' ?
Maybe you should do some research. Being president of the US gives you no power anywhere... He can't go to say... Australia and tell some person to get on the floor so he can walk on them.

You always post pro anti-USA...that's how it was typical. Deny it if you want, we all know it's true.

I didn't say he can, so don't put words in my mouth. Like I said, you don't know anything about international laws.

xWhite_Shadowx

09-30-2009, 11:48 PM

this is true owned wyi

Who you is? :P

Pain_ELementaL

09-30-2009, 11:48 PM

Oh, you might want to look into executive order too WIY. The most powerful action known to present day civilization.

SmExY_AsHLeY

09-30-2009, 11:49 PM

damn sorry i cant type grr damn you WS lol

WhoIsYou

09-30-2009, 11:59 PM

this is true owned wyi
That's the military, people who have given themselves over to the US Government. It's not people from another country or random people off the street.

You always post pro anti-USA...that's how it was typical. Deny it if you want, we all know it's true.

I didn't say he can, so don't put words in my mouth. Like I said, you don't know anything about international laws.
I only post it when it comes up, you brought up the subject by saying what you said (blah blah US president being most powerful person in the world). Like I said it's not giving them power in other countries, and I know enough.

Oh, you might want to look into executive order too WIY. The most powerful action known to present day civilization.
That's only relevant to your own country though.

SmExY_AsHLeY

10-01-2009, 12:01 AM

That's the military, people who have given themselves over to the US Government. It's not people from another country or random people off the street.

duh.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:01 AM

Oh ok, So an executive order that involves international changes...only effects the US?

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:01 AM

duh.

.hud

SmExY_AsHLeY

10-01-2009, 12:01 AM

hey ws stop picking on me damn it rofl

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:02 AM

It's not fun picking on anyone else, because they don't really care. :P

SmExY_AsHLeY

10-01-2009, 12:03 AM

rofl oh ok then xD

BLack_OpsKiLLa

10-01-2009, 12:05 AM

The only way for people to just throw themselves at you like that are conquered nations. The U.S could do that to mexico or canada. Besides the president is the first person to blame when things go wrong. Why is that? He has allot of the power to make decisions. He can make tariffs against other countrys which is a form of a power and force them to pay the U.S government

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:11 AM

duh.
Then I wasn't owned? Kthx.

Oh ok, So an executive order that involves international changes...only effects the US?
I'm not really sure what you think an executive order is?

The only way for people to just throw themselves at you like that are conquered nations. The U.S could do that to mexico or canada. Besides the president is the first person to blame when things go wrong. Why is that? He has allot of the power to make decisions. He can make tariffs against other countrys which is a form of a power and force them to pay the U.S government

Any country can place tariffs against other countries.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:12 AM

I'm not really sure what you think an executive order is?

I know exactly what it is, maybe you should look into it.

CaNANDian

10-01-2009, 12:13 AM

FFFFFFFFUUUUUU terrorists, hijacked my thrad

BLack_OpsKiLLa

10-01-2009, 12:14 AM

But if they want to actually make real money they have to come to the U.S. Canada would fail if they stoped all trading with the U.S.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:14 AM

I know exactly what it is, maybe you should look into it.

I already know what it is... Perhaps you should look into it -_-
:)

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:15 AM

I know hao to ryde byke wit handuwbaws awff?

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:16 AM

I already know what it is... Perhaps you should look into it -_-
:)

If you know what it is...what's your question? You said executive orders only effect the US, which is untrue.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:22 AM

But if they want to actually make real money they have to come to the U.S. Canada would fail if they stoped all trading with the U.S.

Canada and the US are both have each other as major trading partners and would probably both fail if they didn't have each other, anyway, this has nothing to do with Canada vs US, go find another thread to start that in.

If you know what it is...what's your question? You said executive orders only effect the US, which is untrue.

Well it depends how you look at it. We're talking about the US president having actual power in other countries, and you brought up EO.

EO isn't giving the president of the US actual power in other countries.

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:23 AM

You do know Canada, U.S., and Mexico are all 3 one of the closest knit countries, all 3 have to look out for each other.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:25 AM

Canada and the US are both have each other as major trading partners and would probably both fail if they didn't have each other, anyway, this has nothing to do with Canada vs US, go find another thread to start that in.

Well it depends how you look at it. We're talking about the US president having actual power in other countries, and you brought up EO.

EO isn't giving the president of the US actual power in other countries.

You said it doesn't give any actual powers outside of the US, which is false. It may not be a direct effect, but an executive order can affect internationally. Take it as you will, it's the truth.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:29 AM

You said it doesn't give any actual powers outside of the US, which is false. It may not be a direct effect, but an executive order can affect internationally. Take it as you will, it's the truth.

Actually no, what I had said is that it's only relevant to your own country.
As in, you can only place laws within your own country.

So yes, you are correct in the sense that the laws can affect other countries, but the same can be said for any other country that passes a law.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:31 AM

Actually no, what I had said is that it's only relevant to your own country.
As in, you can only place laws within your own country.

So yes, you are correct in the sense that the laws can affect other countries, but the same can be said for any other country that passes a law.

Right you are, BUT...we're talking about EO's, not laws. Laws involve more than just the president, which is why I brought up EO's and how they make a president "the most powerful"

CaNANDian

10-01-2009, 12:32 AM

Right you are, BUT...we're talking about EO's, not laws. Laws involve more than just the president, which is why I brought up EO's and how they make a president "the most powerful"
but at what cost?

Blaze_Fire

10-01-2009, 12:33 AM

but at what cost?
Over 9000

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:35 AM

Over 9000

I lol'd

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:36 AM

Right you are, BUT...we're talking about EO's, not laws. Laws involve more than just the president, which is why I brought up EO's and how they make a president "the most powerful"

See but now we're really getting into specific things.
You can't call it "the most powerful position in the world" as some other heads of other countries can do similar things (I don't believe they call it executive order either, but it's the same idea).
Perhaps you can say something like... The President of the US being the most powerful head of a country (in relation to other countries, dur) since he/she has such a power, but then again as mentioned, others have similar powers.... But they're still not ruling over other countries. Just passing 'laws' (yeah, yeah, EOs) that affect relations between their country and others or what not.

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:38 AM

Sounding less like an argument and more like agreement. I rike it! Maybe we pway shocom tomorrow?

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:38 AM

See but now we're really getting into specific things.
You can't call it "the most powerful position in the world" as some other heads of other countries can do similar things (I don't believe they call it executive order either, but it's the same idea).
Perhaps you can say something like... The President of the US being the most powerful head of a country (in relation to other countries, dur) since he/she has such a power, but then again as mentioned, others have similar powers.... But they're still not ruling over other countries. Just passing 'laws' (yeah, yeah, EOs) that affect relations between their country and others or what not.

Well, it's the most powerful position in the most powerful country in the world...so it kinda goes hand in hand.

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:39 AM

Well, it's the most powerful position in the most powerful country in the world...so it kinda goes hand in hand.

I'll take that as a yes to socom <3

CaNANDian

10-01-2009, 12:39 AM

I like turtles.

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:40 AM

i like turtles.

shut the fuck up why are you so off topic the topic is about girls getting slapped you fucking faggot get the fuck out of here.

Edit: Fucking caps went to all lower case :[

CaNANDian

10-01-2009, 12:41 AM

shut the fuck up why are you so off topic the topic is about girls getting slapped you fucking faggot get the fuck out of here.
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj273/brl131psu/midgetdancing2.gif

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:43 AM

ahahahaah

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:47 AM

Well, it's the most powerful position in the most powerful country in the world...so it kinda goes hand in hand.

Lol yes, of course you had to resort to that xD

Still not making the President the most powerful person in the world...

Countries are only powerful due to what they have. Take that away, and the country is suddenly less powerful. What would happen if every country broke any relations they have with the US (and made up for it by going to other countries for whatever they needed)? The US would have their military, but then what happens to your economy, or just your supply of anything. Quite a bit of the US's electricity comes from outside the US... If that gets cut off... What happens?

Of course the same can be said for pretty much any country, but my point is... Calling a single country the most powerful is idiotic, because they need the support from other countries as well.

But yes... As it stands, if you really want to look at it your way the US is "The most powerful country"

(Still doesn't make el pres the most powerful in the world though xD)

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 12:52 AM

CaNANDian

10-01-2009, 12:52 AM

ill just leave this here... http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2009/09/obamagoths.jpg

Lol, the Spanish Prime Ministers daughters

Do not want.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 12:55 AM

The US COULD be self efficient for about 3 decades before needing other countries, it's been calculated, found that out in Economics :P, they just have to ration products, the US can make most of what they need, but Specialization and Trade makes it easier and cheaper for other countries to do it, all the while stimulating the economy and increasing GDP, so on its own the US could last.

I'd really like to see that, as I find that extremely hard to believe...
You definitely wouldn't be running as a super power with the changes you'd have to make even if you could survive for 30 years...

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 12:58 AM

Lol yes, of course you had to resort to that xD

Still not making the President the most powerful person in the world...

Countries are only powerful due to what they have. Take that away, and the country is suddenly less powerful. What would happen if every country broke any relations they have with the US (and made up for it by going to other countries for whatever they needed)? The US would have their military, but then what happens to your economy, or just your supply of anything. Quite a bit of the US's electricity comes from outside the US... If that gets cut off... What happens?

Of course the same can be said for pretty much any country, but my point is... Calling a single country the most powerful is idiotic, because they need the support from other countries as well.

But yes... As it stands, if you really want to look at it your way the US is "The most powerful country"

(Still doesn't make el pres the most powerful in the world though xD)

lol, that right there makes your whole huge ass scenario defunct. Of course if everything that makes the US what it is suddenly disappeared...it wouldn't be what it is today.

Sure, the US needs support from other countries...but so does every other country in the world.

(fact: el pres is the most powerful person in the most powerful country. anything more than that...well, I guess that's harder to identify...so take it as you will.)

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 01:04 AM

lol, that right there makes your whole huge ass scenario defunct. Of course if everything that makes the US what it is suddenly disappeared...it wouldn't be what it is today.

No, it doesn't make it 'defunct' it's just a fact. Like I said, my whole point is, the country is powerful due to it's support/relations with other countries as well. On it's own, it's no powerhouse.

Sure, the US needs support from other countries...but so does every other country in the world.
Exactly what I said...

(fact: el pres is the most powerful person in the most powerful country. anything more than that...well, I guess that's harder to identify...so take it as you will.)
That still doesn't mean that the President of the US is the most powerful person in the world.
That would be like saying:
Oh SOCOM is a harder game than COD, so the best player at SOCOM is definitely better than everyone else when he plays COD too...

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 01:12 AM

No, it doesn't make it 'defunct' it's just a fact. Like I said, my whole point is, the country is powerful due to it's support/relations with other countries as well. On it's own, it's no powerhouse.

Exactly what I said...

That still doesn't mean that the President of the US is the most powerful person in the world.
That would be like saying:
Oh SOCOM is a harder game than COD, so the best player at SOCOM is definitely better than everyone else when he plays COD too...

It does make it defunct, even if it is a fact. You posted a scenario, and then immediately followed with how it was meaningless...making it defunct.

EVERY country out there is powerful because of its relations with other countries. NO country out there would be what it is today without its support...I don't know why you don't get that. If every country somehow became independent, solely working in the chaos of internal work only... the USA would most likely be on top.

And that's a horrible analogy. COD and Socom have nothing to do with each other. You're basically comparing the power of the US to that of the Martian Military.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 01:19 AM

It does make it defunct, even if it is a fact. You posted a scenario, and then immediately followed with how it was meaningless...making it defunct.

I didn't say it was meaningless... I simply stated the truth...... That it applies for every country. But that doesn't mean what I said is incorrect.

EVERY country out there is powerful because of its relations with other countries. NO country out there would be what it is today without its support...I don't know why you don't get that. If every country somehow became independent, solely working in the chaos of internal work only... the USA would most likely be on top.
I DO get that every country is where it is because of it's support, although I don't get how you still think the US would come out on top... All they'd really have is the military. A lot of countries have a lot more resources that would allow them to survive on their own. Honestly, what will you do? Blow up a few countries then slowly die?

And that's a horrible analogy. COD and Socom have nothing to do with each other. You're basically comparing the power of the US to that of the Martian Military.

Nah, the point wasn't the actual games... It was the 'difficulty' and how being the best at the harder thing doesn't necessarily mean you're the best at everything.
Same with power, being the most powerful person of the most powerful country, doesn't mean you're the most powerful overall.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 01:25 AM

I didn't say it was meaningless... I simply stated the truth...... That it applies for every country. But that doesn't mean what I said is incorrect.

I DO get that every country is where it is because of it's support, although I don't get how you still think the US would come out on top... All they'd really have is the military. A lot of countries have a lot more resources that would allow them to survive on their own. Honestly, what will you do? Blow up a few countries then slowly die?

Nah, the point wasn't the actual games... It was the 'difficulty' and how being the best at the harder thing doesn't necessarily mean you're the best at everything.
Same with power, being the most powerful person of the most powerful country, doesn't mean you're the most powerful overall.

Oh yeah, we only have a military...no big deal. I mean, it's only what governs international law...no biggy.

"A lot of countries have a lot more resources that would allow them to survive on their own. Honestly, what will you do? Blow up a few countries then slowly die?"

Lol! Yeah, they'll sit there and use their fuel to drive cars around, and eat their crops...meanwhile we use our military to take it all? C'mon, use your head.

It's obvious I'm not going to be able to convince you that the US president is the most powerful person on the world, so I'd like to ask that you tell me who is.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 01:30 AM

Oh yeah, we only have a military...no big deal. I mean, it's only what governs international law...no biggy.

"A lot of countries have a lot more resources that would allow them to survive on their own. Honestly, what will you do? Blow up a few countries then slowly die?"

Lol! Yeah, they'll sit there and use their fuel to drive cars around, and eat their crops...meanwhile we use our military to take it all? C'mon, use your head.

It's obvious I'm not going to be able to convince you that the US president is the most powerful person on the world, so I'd like to ask that you tell me who is.

"Lol! Yeah, they'll sit there and use their fuel to drive cars around, and eat their crops...meanwhile we use our military to take it all? C'mon, use your head."

Having the largest army or most powerful doesn't mean you can take out EVERY other country, unless you plan on nuking them... In that case, there's nothing left for you to take... Which leads me back to the "dying slowly" So yeah, there goes that.

"It's obvious I'm not going to be able to convince you that the US president is the most powerful person on the world, so I'd like to ask that you tell me who is."

No one and everyone.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 01:41 AM

"Lol! Yeah, they'll sit there and use their fuel to drive cars around, and eat their crops...meanwhile we use our military to take it all? C'mon, use your head."

Having the largest army or most powerful doesn't mean you can take out EVERY other country, unless you plan on nuking them... In that case, there's nothing left for you to take... Which leads me back to the "dying slowly" So yeah, there goes that.

"It's obvious I'm not going to be able to convince you that the US president is the most powerful person on the world, so I'd like to ask that you tell me who is."

No one and everyone.

"Having the largest army or most powerful doesn't mean you can take out EVERY other country, unless you plan on nuking them... In that case, there's nothing left for you to take... Which leads me back to the "dying slowly" So yeah, there goes that."

You make it sound like all the US can do is nuke. Having a powerful military involves much more than nuclear warfare. If the US decided to take over Canada, nukes wouldn't need to be used...same for Mexico. Your land would still be usable...preventing the "slowly dying". Sure, nukes can be used on Russia, China, or some other huge threats...but it's not like the entire world needs to be nuked.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 01:46 AM

"Having the largest army or most powerful doesn't mean you can take out EVERY other country, unless you plan on nuking them... In that case, there's nothing left for you to take... Which leads me back to the "dying slowly" So yeah, there goes that."

You make it sound like all the US can do is nuke. Having a powerful military involves much more than nuclear warfare. If the US decided to take over Canada, nukes wouldn't need to be used...same for Mexico. Your land would still be usable...preventing the "slowly dying". Sure, nukes can be used on Russia, China, or some other huge threats...but it's not like the entire world needs to be nuked.

Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first...

And really, if the US were to take over Canada and Mexico, how would you use all that land or even keep control over it?

We're getting into really stupid scenarios now -_-

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 01:51 AM

Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first...

And really, if the US were to take over Canada and Mexico, how would you use all that land or even keep control over it?

We're getting into really stupid scenarios now -_-

Right, because I'm sure Canada or Mexico would nuke the US.

The US has expanded from 13 colonies to 50 states (plus multiple territories) just fine...adding a few more wouldn't be a problem. Considering that Texas used to belong to Mexico, Florida to Spain, and many others... it wouldn't be entirely illogical for more to come.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 01:57 AM

Right, because I'm sure Canada or Mexico would nuke the US.

The US has expanded from 13 colonies to 50 states (plus multiple territories) just fine...adding a few more wouldn't be a problem. Considering that Texas used to belong to Mexico, Florida to Spain, and many others... it wouldn't be entirely illogical for more to come.

Um... I never said anything about Canada or Mexico nuke the US... So yeah.... Ever hear of China?

And yeah, that expansion didn't happen over night... Not to mention, Canada alone is already larger than the whole US, so have fun?

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:06 AM

Um... I never said anything about Canada or Mexico nuke the US... So yeah.... Ever hear of China?

And yeah, that expansion didn't happen over night... Not to mention, Canada alone is already larger than the whole US, so have fun?

"Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first..."

We were talking about multiple countries, and you didn't specify which ones you were referring to...so I could only assume. You made it sound like Canada and Mexico would use nukes (since they were included in the conversation that was at hand) I said Nuke the big threats like Russia and China...of course there would be nukes back.

I didn't say it happened over night...and I don't know how that has anything to do with this.

Landmass size has nothing to do with anything. Watchout for badass greenland eh?

(Not to mention that half of Canada is uninhabitable)

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 02:10 AM

"Well that's not what I was trying to make it sound like, but the point still stands... If you're going to start taking over land in such a situation, then you might want to start using nukes, because at that point, it's whoever hits the other first..."

We were talking about multiple countries, and you didn't specify which ones you were referring to...so I could only assume. You made it sound like Canada and Mexico would use nukes (since they were included in the conversation that was at hand) I said Nuke the big threats like Russia and China...of course there would be nukes back.

I didn't say it happened over night...and I don't know how that has anything to do with this.

Landmass size has nothing to do with anything. Watchout for badass greenland eh?

(Not to mention that half of Canada is uninhabitable)

Size of the land has a lot to do with it
Uninhabitable land is still land you have to traverse? People live all over Canada, east, west, north, south.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:13 AM

Size of the land has a lot to do with it
Uninhabitable land is still land you have to traverse? People live all over Canada, east, west, north, south.

lol, you make it sound like some hobo living out in the tundra is going to fight against the US military.

Also, it's not like a landmass can only be taken over if every last inhabitant is killed. There's a reason why Florida has strong Spanish traits, and Texas with Mexican traits.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 02:22 AM

lol, you make it sound like some hobo living out in the tundra is going to fight against the US military.

Also, it's not like a landmass can only be taken over if every last inhabitant is killed. There's a reason why Florida has strong Spanish traits, and Texas with Mexican traits.

I'm not making anything sound like anything, you're just 'hearing' what you want to... All I said is that people live all around.

And you'd have to kill a lot of them, or get rid of them somehow, you can't just expect everyone to bow before the US....
And taking over is only half of it, how would you CONTROL the all that land? (We're counting Mexico as well), you'd probably never know what going on, and some separate government would probably form, and never be a part of the US...
Otherwise the inhabitants of the land may just fight back, and therefore you would have to kill everyone.....
then what? Everyone from the US is just going to hop in their cars and move north and start working? Lol k...

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 02:38 AM

And now for a word from our sponsers....

You always post pro anti-USA...that's how it was typical. Deny it if you want, we all know it's true.

I didn't say he can, so don't put words in my mouth. Like I said, you don't know anything about international laws.

First of all, I would like to thank Pain_ELemental for coining the term "pro anti-USA" in all it's self-contradictory glory.

hey ws stop picking on me damn it rofl

Second, I would like to point at that in the same nature of the comment which started this all...SmExY, you're a woman, go take over WS' life!

I know hao to ryde byke wit handuwbaws awff?

That's the right idea! (either that or smexy took my advice and WS just can't seem to talk straight these days)

If you know what it is...what's your question? You said executive orders only effect the US, which is untrue.

How many times can you go around the same circle?

Over 9000

Lol

Countries are only powerful due to what they have. Take that away, and the country is suddenly less powerful.

No shit. I have a specially customized power drill for...well lets not get into that right now...the point is, without being plugged in to electricity, it would never be satis--, i mean powerful enough to do anything. And one of my relatives has a jack hammer that also needs power. Now you can't tell me that the drill is just as powerful as the jack hammer because they have the same power source.

The US COULD be self efficient for about 3 decades before needing other countries, it's been calculated, found that out in Economics :P, they just have to ration products, the US can make most of what they need, but Specialization and Trade makes it easier and cheaper for other countries to do it, all the while stimulating the economy and increasing GDP, so on its own the US could last.

Except without other countries to make fun of and try to turn democratic, we might die off over lack of pride.

ill just leave this here... http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gawker/2009/09/obamagoths.jpg

Lol, the Spanish Prime Ministers daughters

Do not want.

Brilliant.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:40 AM

I'm not making anything sound like anything, you're just 'hearing' what you want to... All I said is that people live all around.

And you'd have to kill a lot of them, or get rid of them somehow, you can't just expect everyone to bow before the US....
And taking over is only half of it, how would you CONTROL the all that land? (We're counting Mexico as well), you'd probably never know what going on, and some separate government would probably form, and never be a part of the US...
Otherwise the inhabitants of the land may just fight back, and therefore you would have to kill everyone.....
then what? Everyone from the US is just going to hop in their cars and move north and start working? Lol k...

Jesus Christ you need a history lesson. Newsflash: This wouldn't be the first time a territory has been taken over.

"I'm not making anything sound like anything, you're just 'hearing' what you want to... All I said is that people live all around."

Ok, if you didn't mean for them to be combative, then that's a completely pointless statement.

The US took over Texas, and look at it now. It's just like every other state.
The US took over Florida, and look at it now. It's just like every other state. Hell, most of the US was taken from someone in some way.

Do you think Texas was empty when it was taken over? Do you think everyone in Texas was happy about the takeover? Do you think that everybody "bowed down" to their new country? No, no, and no.

You're making yourself look like an idiot here.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:42 AM

And now for a word from our sponsers....

First of all, I would like to thank Pain_ELemental for coining the term "pro anti-USA" in all it's self-contradictory glory.

I'd like to thank MAD for quoting two terms together, and then trying to say they were one. Notice the placement of the dash pal.

Pro anti-USA, which would mean he is in agreement with "anti-USA".

Thanks.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 02:44 AM

I'd like to thank MAD for quoting two terms together, and then trying to say they were one. Notice the placement of the dash pal.

Pro anti-USA, which would mean he is in agreement with "anti-USA".

Thanks.

Yes because agreeing with being anti is not the same as being anti?

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 02:45 AM

Jesus Christ you need a history lesson. Newsflash: This wouldn't be the first time a territory has been taken over.

"I'm not making anything sound like anything, you're just 'hearing' what you want to... All I said is that people live all around."

Ok, if you didn't mean for them to be combative, then that's a completely pointless statement.

The US took over Texas, and look at it now. It's just like every other state.
The US took over Florida, and look at it now. It's just like every other state. Hell, most of the US was taken from someone in some way.

Do you think Texas was empty when it was taken over? Do you think everyone in Texas was happy about the takeover? Do you think that everybody "bowed down" to their new country? No, no, and no.

You're making yourself look like an idiot here.

I think I know my history, thanks. My point still being, shit doesn't happen over night, so good luck with that.

"Ok, if you didn't mean for them to be combative, then that's a completely pointless statement. "

Go back and read again or think about what you just said.

----

Same with Quebec, and notice that it's STILL a mostly french province after all this time?
Why? Because the assimilation and take-over of a single province failed miserably.
Couldn't stop it then and still can't stop it now. (And I know it wasn't the US, not the point)
The point is, good luck taking over two whole countries, probably wouldn't even manage to take over one.

Destroying it is another story.

So yeah, if anyone is looking like an idiot, it's you.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:45 AM

Yes because agreeing with being anti is not the same as being anti?

Correct. I agree with Communism, but I am not a communist.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 02:47 AM

Correct. I agree with Communism, but I am not a communist.

But you stated that he always takes the anti-usa side of things. do you always take the communist side? (how anti-american of you)

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:50 AM

I think I know my history, thanks. My point still being, shit doesn't happen over night, so good luck with that.

"Ok, if you didn't mean for them to be combative, then that's a completely pointless statement. "

Go back and read again or think about what you just said.

----

Same with Quebec, and notice that it's STILL a mostly french province after all this time?
Why? Because the assimilation and take-over of a single province failed miserably.
Couldn't stop it then and still can't stop it now. (And I know it wasn't the US, not the point)
The point is, good luck taking over two whole countries, probably wouldn't even manage to take over one.

Destroying it is another story.

So yeah, if anyone is looking like an idiot, it's you.

There you go bringing "didn't happen over night" again. Time was never a factor of this debate, so stop bringing it up.

Who the fuck cares about Quebec? Ok, so Canada failed at taking it over completely....Texas and Florida went just fine for the US.

Be as defiant as you want, neither Canada nor Mexico would pose a stand against the US in a war/takeover/ complete annihilation...call it whatever you want.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 02:51 AM

Who the fuck cares about Quebec? Ok, so Canada failed at taking it over completely....Texas and Florida went just fine for the US.

Not that I agree, but that was funny as hell. I laughed for real. And that doesn't happen often.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 02:52 AM

But you stated that he always takes the anti-usa side of things. do you always take the communist side? (how anti-american of you)

He does always take the anti-american side of things.

Do I always take the communist side? Yes, I am one single-person living in a democratic nation, yet I live and do everything in complete communism.

You're blowing things out of proportion MAD.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 02:54 AM

There you go bringing "didn't happen over night" again. Time was never a factor of this debate, so stop bringing it up.

Who the fuck cares about Quebec? Ok, so Canada failed at taking it over completely....Texas and Florida went just fine for the US.

Be as defiant as you want, neither Canada nor Mexico would pose a stand against the US in a war/takeover/ complete annihilation...call it whatever you want.

Time is definitely a factor and always will be when it comes to takeover of land.

The point with Quebec is that not everything is as easy as you think.
I may as well say Who gives a fuck about Texas and Florida if you're gonna say that about Quebec. Not my fault they sucked. Two small parts of land/small amounts of people, definitely not the same as a whole damn country.

And there you go back to your super-power bullshit. Okay? So you can beat the shit out of Canada and Mexico... Exactly what I said earlier, that's not aiding you in ANY way when it comes to surviving on your own... You'd still die slowly while all the other countries that don't rely on war are living and laughing at your sorry asses.

Quit relying on your army, it won't get you guys far.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 02:56 AM

He does always take the anti-american side of things.

Do I always take the communist side? Yes, I am one single-person living in a democratic nation, yet I live and do everything in complete communism.

You're blowing things out of proportion MAD.

I never said he didnt. Just trying to get you to point out what keeps him from being anti-usa.

And if you being a single person is an effort to downsize the argument which I have put effort into blowing out of proportion, then I suppose wiy could use the same technique to say that his pro anti-use tendencies are not a big deal at all.

Blowing stuff out of proportion is more fun when arguing. ;)

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:00 AM

Time is definitely a factor and always will be when it comes to takeover of land.

The point with Quebec is that not everything is as easy as you think.
I may as well say Who gives a fuck about Texas and Florida if you're gonna say that about Quebec. Not my fault they sucked. Two small parts of land/small amounts of people, definitely not the same as a whole damn country.

And there you go back to your super-power bullshit. Okay? So you can beat the shit out of Canada and Mexico... Exactly what I said earlier, that's not aiding you in ANY way when it comes to surviving on your own... You'd still die slowly while all the other countries that don't really on war are living and laughing at your sorry asses.

Quit relying on your army, it won't get you guys far.

This would be so much easier if you'd learn to fucking read correctly. I never said Time was not a factor of taking over land, I said it was never a factor of this debate. Neither of us were in disagreement in that it would take a long time to do.

I didn't mean "fuck Quebec" personally...my point was that it has nothing to do with this conversation. You're bringing in Canada's inability to takeover land, into a debate about the US taking over land.

Right, right...everyone will laugh at the US. Is that the best you can come up with? We'll just use the military that "wont get us far" to take care of that eh? harharharhar.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:04 AM

I never said he didnt. Just trying to get you to point out what keeps him from being anti-usa.

And if you being a single person is an effort to downsize the argument which I have put effort into blowing out of proportion, then I suppose wiy could use the same technique to say that his pro anti-use tendencies are not a big deal at all.

Blowing stuff out of proportion is more fun when arguing. ;)

How did this get from you misreading what I said, to a "leave wiy alone" conversation?

"Just trying to get you to point out what keeps him from being anti-usa."

I don't understand this at all.Obviously nothing is holding him back...considering that he is freely going against the US at every chance he gets...

No, what was blown out of proportion is you comparing Wiy's US hate, to my lifestyle.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:07 AM

This would be so much easier if you'd learn to fucking read correctly. I never said Time was not a factor of taking over land, I said it was never a factor of this debate. Neither of us were in disagreement in that it would take a long time to do.

I didn't mean "fuck Quebec" personally...my point was that it has nothing to do with this conversation. You're bringing in Canada's inability to takeover land, into a debate about the US taking over land.

Right, right...everyone will laugh at the US. Is that the best you can come up with? We'll just use the military that "wont get us far" to take care of that eh? harharharhar.

Just because we weren't in a disagreement doesn't mean it's not a part of this debate, as it's a valid thing to point out.

I know what you meant when you said "Fuck Quebec" and I meant the same when I said I could say the same about Texas and Florida.
Also, Quebec was Canada, it's not Canada that took itself over, it's the English colonies.... The same ones that took over the land known as the United States of America, except you guys fought 'yourselves' for independence... So yeah... Same people, different name, basically failed to take us over, yet you got Florida and Texas.... Which is exactly my point... They simply sucked. You wouldn't be able to takeover an entire Country or two.

And lololol at your whole argument now is just using your military. Because blowing up the rest of the world will really keep you guys alive? I mean yeah, it will keep you alive in the sense that other countries won't be there to blow you up (unless they do first) but then you'll all just rot away.
Which is back to my proof. You won't get anywhere with your military. You'll just end up killing yourselves = the failure of your "all powerful" country.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 03:07 AM

How did this get from you misreading what I said, to a "leave wiy alone" conversation?

"Just trying to get you to point out what keeps him from being anti-usa."

I don't understand this at all.Obviously nothing is holding him back...considering that he is freely going against the US at every chance he gets...No, what was blown out of proportion is you comparing Wiy's US hate, to my lifestyle.

This is not a leave WIY alone conversation. I would never start one of those. Haha. He can hold his own. (as illogical as it may be when he does)

This all branched off from "pro anti-usa". You then told me that there is a difference between being "pro anti-usa" and being "anti-usa". That means there must be something that keeps WIY from qualifying for "anti-usa" and instead leaves him with only "pro anti-usa"

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:08 AM

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:13 AM

Just because we weren't in a disagreement doesn't mean it's not a part of this debate, as it's a valid thing to point out.

I know what you meant when you said "Fuck Quebec" and I meant the same when I said I could say the same about Texas and Florida.
Also, Quebec was Canada, it's not Canada that took itself over, it's the English colonies.... The same ones that took over the land known as the United States of America, except you guys fought 'yourselves' for independence... So yeah... Same people, different name, basically failed to take us over, yet you got Florida and Texas.... Which is exactly my point... They simply sucked. You wouldn't be able to takeover an entire Country or two.

And lololol at your whole argument now is just using your military. Because blowing up the rest of the world will really keep you guys alive? I mean yeah, it will keep you alive in the sense that other countries won't be there to blow you up (unless they do first) but then you'll all just rot away.
Which is back to my proof. You won't get anywhere with your military. You'll just end up killing yourselves = the failure of your "all powerful" country.

It's not even worth extending this any more with you. Everything you bring up is so juvenile, it's pathetic. You seriously need to stick to debating about things that you know about, because it's not working for you in this topic. Maybe in your head it is, but anyone who see's this will laugh at you.

I know you think I'm wrong, but it's ok...you don't know any better. Wait a few years until after you've taken some real college government classes to debate about it.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:14 AM

I am in no way "against the USA"
I'm against people like you who think it's almighty because of your military.

Ha! Show me where I said it's almighty only because of it's Military. It was YOU who said that all we have is a military. Hypocrite much?

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:15 AM

It's not even worth extending this any more with you. Everything you bring up is so juvenile, it's pathetic. You seriously need to stick to debating about things that you know about, because it's not working for you in this topic. Maybe in your head it is, but anyone who see's this will laugh at you.

I know you think I'm wrong, but it's ok...you don't know any better. Wait a few years until after you've taken some real college government classes to debate about it.

It's really funny because I could pretty much say the exact same thing to you.
Anyway, enjoy yourself thinking you're uber 1337 because your country has a big army.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:16 AM

Ha! Show me where I said it's almighty only because of it's Military. It was YOU who said that all we have is a military. Hypocrite much?

It's what you bring up in every other argument.
"Zomfg we has bigg0r army we r pwn Canada easy!"

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:17 AM

This is not a leave WIY alone conversation. I would never start one of those. Haha. He can hold his own. (as illogical as it may be when he does)

This all branched off from "pro anti-usa". You then told me that there is a difference between being "pro anti-usa" and being "anti-usa". That means there must be something that keeps WIY from qualifying for "anti-usa" and instead leaves him with only "pro anti-usa"

No no buddy, you took that wrong. You quoted "pro anti-usa" as one term...which like you said, is contradictory.

Now, how I said it was pro anti-usa. If I had said he was straight up anti-usa, that'd be pushing it. If I say he's in agreement with anti-usa (pro anti-usa), that expresses how I feel perfectly.

It's stupid that it's coming down to this.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:18 AM

It's really funny because I could pretty much say the exact same thing to you.
Anyway, enjoy yourself thinking you're uber 1337 because your country has a big army.

Nah, I'll enjoy knowing that I'm uber 1337 because my country has a big army, and much more as well.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:19 AM

It's what you bring up in every other argument.
"Zomfg we has bigg0r army we r pwn Canada easy!"

In this situation, that's what it comes down to. What do you expect me to brag about, that we make better cars?

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 03:19 AM

No no buddy, you took that wrong. You quoted "pro anti-usa" as one term...which like you said, is contradictory.

Now, how I said it was pro anti-usa. If I had said he was straight up anti-usa, that'd be pushing it. If I say he's in agreement with anti-usa (pro anti-usa), that expresses how I feel perfectly.

It's stupid that it's coming down to this.

Oh tell me about it. It was just a joke. I didn't think you would actually take it seriously but then I guess it's understandable since you were in the middle of a raging debate with wiy. I honestly don't care that much about it. It gave me a good laugh. =]

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:19 AM

Nah, I'll enjoy knowing that I'm uber 1337 because my country has a big army, and much more as well.

Mmmkay, have a nice night, sleep tight ^_^

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:20 AM

In this situation, that's what it comes down to. What do you expect me to brag about, that we make better cars?

The point was living off resources, it came down to your army again, invading... Then you couldn't support that so you had to resort to blowing up the countries... Which would just leave you to die anyway... So your army isn't saving you.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:21 AM

Oh tell me about it. It was just a joke. I didn't think you would actually take it seriously but then I guess it's understandable since you were in the middle of a raging debate with wiy. I honestly don't care that much about it. It gave me a good laugh. =]

-_- I hate you.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 03:23 AM

-_- I hate you.

Rofl

You know you've done a great job when someone rewards your effort with "I hate you".

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:24 AM

The point was living off resources, it came down to your army again, invading... Then you couldn't support that so you had to resort to blowing up the countries... Which would just leave you to die anyway... So your army isn't saving you.

Dude, you do realize that you can take over/blow up a country without destroying everything in it...right. It is still possible to harvest crops in a country that is no longer run by its previous owners.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:24 AM

Rofl

You know you've done a great job when someone rewards your effort with "I hate you".

lol, I'd say you done did troll me good.

Faggot.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:27 AM

Dude, you do realize that you can take over/blow up a country without destroying everything in it...right. It is still possible to harvest crops in a country that is no longer run by its previous owners.

Oh and who's gonna explore the whole country to find uninhabited farms that still have undamaged crops, then harvest them and bring them back to the US and hand it out to people?

Lolk.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:28 AM

Oh and who's gonna explore the whole country to find uninhabited farms that still have undamaged crops, then harvest them and bring them back to the US and hand it out to people?

Lolk.

A soaring unemployment rate would work damn well with this.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:33 AM

Okay well have fun exploring Canada on foot for food?

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:35 AM

Okay well have fun exploring Canada on foot for food?

Who said anything about 'on foot'?

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:38 AM

Who said anything about 'on foot'?

Mkay, so how else would you manage? Don't forget all this was under the circumstance that all the countries stopped supporting each other (otherwise you would have never attacked Canada).
So what are you gonna use? Bicycles? Roller blades? You won't be finding fuel in the middle of Canada, so cars, planes, or anything else is out of the question.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:46 AM

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 03:54 AM

Ha, I'm not keeping any of that in mind. The scenario changed when you said the US couldn't take over Canada or Mexico. The whole 'countries working on their own' was a scenario of the past, and you know it sucka.

We'll be taking our fuel-powered vehicles now.

LOLOL wow, you ARE stupid. Nothing ever changed. That was the point, you said the US would take over Canada and Mexico if all countries stopped supporting each other. AND YOU KNOW IT SUCKA!!!!!

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 04:14 AM

LOLOL wow, you ARE stupid. Nothing ever changed. That was the point, you said the US would take over Canada and Mexico if all countries stopped supporting each other. AND YOU KNOW IT SUCKA!!!!!

Show me where I said that, I'd love to see.

And you have no place to call me stupid, as I'm farther and more successful than you'll ever be. Enjoy endless nights of 4chan for the rest of your life.

WhoIsYou

10-01-2009, 04:19 AM

Show me where I said that, I'd love to see.

And you have no place to call me stupid, as I'm farther and more successful than you'll ever be. Enjoy endless nights of 4chan for the rest of your life.

Lolol keep telling yourself that to help you sleep at night.

supafly12

10-01-2009, 05:59 AM

i dont think i should get involved but i read all 13 F-ing PAGES OF THIS THREAD

and i want to point a few things out

WIY you were geting somewere with the "on foot" idea
it is a fact that the world is going to run out of oil in a few decades(dont remember how many)
so Russia the USA's #1 enemy is not attacking the USA because Russia knows that
1. blowing up all of America is a waste of fuel because you dont gain anything from it(The USA isnt fighting them right now why waste fuel on blowing up a "super power" THAT U COULD USE).
2. The USA is to powerful to be taken over by force.
3. Russia has other problems to deal with and so does the USA.

China supplies the USA with almost EVERYTHING at a cheap price,
if you attack china your economy drops 75% MINIMUM

and even if you take over Canada and Mexico
HOW IN THE HELL ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE OVER THE REST OF THE WORLD WHEN YOU OUT OF RESOURCES
sure you'll probably drop a few nukes on the earth, but NO ONE CAN RULE THE WORLD (as of today) SO WHY IS THE USA ANY DIFFERENT ???????

Scruffy120

10-01-2009, 03:21 PM

Mkay, so how else would you manage? Don't forget all this was under the circumstance that all the countries stopped supporting each other (otherwise you would have never attacked Canada).
So what are you gonna use? Bicycles? Roller blades? You won't be finding fuel in the middle of Canada, so cars, planes, or anything else is out of the question.

WIY, your failing.
how about a nitrogen powered car? they exist. they are not marketed because nitrogen is super flammable, unlike gas which is flammable, but nitrogen could take out a whole road in a car crash. but that out of mind, NO ONE needs to support you in the effort of getting it. you can do it your self, at home if you have the proper equipment. like pain said, soaring un employment and people will risk it for some money and food for there family's. and the only way that is kind of probable to take down america would be get china to claim our debt. but honestly good luck with that, were strong and would shut them down. then your going to make the argument america isnt the strongest. then ill tell you too fuck your self, i didnt see people fleeing from euro and coming to canada? why? canada sucks, youve got nothing there. free healthcare? whoopty fuckin doo, you get you free health care AFTER you make an appointment, so fuck your health care.

Pain_ELementaL

10-01-2009, 03:33 PM

and even if you take over Canada and Mexico
HOW IN THE HELL ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE OVER THE REST OF THE WORLD WHEN YOU OUT OF RESOURCES
sure you'll probably drop a few nukes on the earth, but NO ONE CAN RULE THE WORLD (as of today) SO WHY IS THE USA ANY DIFFERENT ???????

Whoa whoa now, I never said US could take over the entire world by itself...that would be stupid.

xWhite_Shadowx

10-01-2009, 03:43 PM

Too long didn't read.

MAD Industries

10-01-2009, 09:09 PM

Too long didn't read.

Congrats. You just proved you're smarter than everyone else in this thread. haha.

WhoIsYou

10-02-2009, 03:40 AM

Pain_ELementaL

10-02-2009, 05:36 AM

Lmao scruffy you're a fucking idiot, seriously. Didn't even read the thread then you come running your mouth. I said US was the strongest, not that they're not, so stfu if you're not gonna read properly... And your little car thing, build a car and take pics, leme know how it works out for you, kthx.

You also fail for thinking this is a Canada vs US thread. Your post makes you just as bad as Pain if not worse... Again, have fun with your little military.

There are cars that run on nitrogen, hell there's cars that can run on vegetable oil. Why you're telling Scruff to build his own and take pics...I have no idea. Being able to build your own car is not a requirement to drive it.

WhoIsYou

10-02-2009, 07:13 AM

"you can do it yourself at home if you have the proper equipment"
That's why...

And whether they're aquirable or not means nothing, not every family in the US will be getting their hands on one.

supafly12

10-02-2009, 10:57 AM

"you can do it yourself at home if you have the proper equipment"
That's why...

And whether they're aquirable or not means nothing, not every family in the US will be getting their hands on one.

dude alot of other countries in europe and the middle east already have cars that run on natural gas.
these cars where made to run on gasoline but the put a natural gas tank in there trunk and yo buy this gas reductor thats like 100$ and blast that gas straight into your engine(you can put a switch in the car to switch from natural gas to gasoline)
hell you could even do it on a HUMMER!!!!

they just dont crash like the ppl in the US do....

WhoIsYou

10-02-2009, 11:15 AM

dude alot of other countries in europe and the middle east already have cars that run on natural gas.
these cars where made to run on gasoline but the put a natural gas tank in there trunk and yo buy this gas reductor thats like 100$ and blast that gas straight into your engine(you can put a switch in the car to switch from natural gas to gasoline)
hell you could even do it on a HUMMER!!!!

they just dont crash like the ppl in the US do....

1) Key part of that is "in europe"
2) Natural gas is still fuel. You can only bring so much with you.

SmExY_AsHLeY

10-02-2009, 12:04 PM

i have to say... this thread has alot of diff topics xD. love you guys yall crack me up

Pain_ELementaL

10-02-2009, 03:49 PM

"you can do it yourself at home if you have the proper equipment"
That's why...

And whether they're aquirable or not means nothing, not every family in the US will be getting their hands on one.

"If you have the proper equipment". Of course a 16 year old kid isn't going to have this.

Being aquirable is everything. It's a good thing it doesn't matter if every family in the US can get their hands on one...since the issue at hand is traversing Canada after we take it over...remember?