Re: A Debate With Virtual Holocaust

[TheConfusedHippie]

Well done verecti you giant gimp, by arguing about this vid you gave this idiot what he truly wanted...controversy and attention. This vid is a great big plea for attention and by responding to it in the manner in which you did, yours means contradicted your purpose. You fail!!!

[TonyPro79]

Lose weight and I'll take you seriously.

[Verceti1]

You're a pretentious psuedo-intellect. Using jargon like 'nominal' and 'constiutional monarchy', particularly when you don't know what they mean, doesn't make you sound intelligent or add any weight to your argument. Rather your intellect is illustrated by your ability to think on your feet...deplorable. Also, wikipedia holds no credibility in any respected university. Argument was completely superficial and the only thing you 'thoroughly debunked' was any facade of intelligence you might've had

[pamew]

"your intellect is illustrated by your ability to think on your feet".

Yes, because as we all know, Einsteins theory of relativity, the greatest work his genius produced, was something he wrote down on a napkin during a dinner party.

Saying that intellect is based on one trait alone is moronic.

Oh, and accusing someone of being a Pseudo-intellectual, then proceeding to insult and patronize them under an assumed guise of authority is somewhat Ironic.

In short: You're a cunt.

[Verceti1]

how ironic that you just lecture me then also....and i said 'illustrated'...not 'based'....read it again next time

[pamew]

"how ironic that you just lecture me then also."

Well it would be, If I thought of myself as an intellectual. I don't, I just happen to find pretentious cunts such as your Aids ridden self annoying as fuck.

Oh, and I know which word you used, you said his intelligence was illustrated by one trait, which means guess what? you made a judgment on someone else's mental faculties based on ONE FUCKING THING.

Still a cunt.

[Verceti1]

you're doing the exact same thing to me as i did to the video. if you reckon i'm conceited, then definitely so are you. also, sometimes one trait can completely give it away. it is in fact you who are the cunt. you're obviously friends with this guy or you wouldn't defend that weak-as-piss argument. by the way, when you quote my shit back to me, it just makes you sound like more of a wank

[pamew]

You just called me a verb, you truly are a genius.

And I use quotes for reference, it helps build a more understandable and organized discourse.

I would of thought a great mind like you would of worked that out by now.

[Verceti1]

i really do find it hilariously ironic that you pay me out about how i must think i'm an intellectual; yet you're happy to argue in pretty much the same fashion as i do; and you're happy to be a grammar pedant and point out how i used a verb where i should have used a noun (it's a colloquialism...you wank)....you're just digging yourself into a bigger and bigger hole....and still, prefacing every argument with a quote is a really pretentious technique...don't you think i know what i said?

[pamew]

Yes, I mean, using quotes isn't a practical means of building an argument.

Which is probably why every learning institution on the planet encourages people to do it.

That's right, it's pretentious to make clear references to other peoples writings! be vague! make no references! citation is meaningless! just use a series of colloquialisms (that this Englishman has never heard), and make proceed to say you're opponent is bested without making any real argument yourself?

[pamew]

Oh, and it's pretentious to quote others in order to form your argument is it? Hmm let's see, as per the standard definition of the word:

1."Ostentatious." Well, no. I'm hardly showing off by building a cohesive argument.

2."Anything that makes an unwarranted claim of importance or distinction." Nope, references aren't really someone blowing their own horn.

In conclusion: Stop using big words you don't understand.

Which is, in itself, pretentious.

[Verceti1]

you're so fired up on an argument built on weak foundations...just admit it, the video sucked, the argument was completely superficial and the guy sucked...stop digressing from the issue to make vague insults about my intelligence when you haven't even met me. you're being weak

[pamew]

I never said the video was superb, which is handy, because my opening argument was that you are, in fact, a hypocritical prick.

I notice that you've suddenly dropped that whole argument about pretentiousness that you were so valiantly clinging onto and have said "can't we deal with the issue?!".

I'll assume that has nothing to do with me having to point out that that you clearly don't understand the word properly.

Anyway, my suspicions were correct, so my work here is done.

[Verceti1]

yeah i'm tired of this shit and i need to go to bed. i bet a wank like you would take that as a concession of defeat, since your whole tactic was predicated on berrating me as a pseudo intellect (in the exact same way i berrated the video....despite the fact that i never pretended to be smart, which is exactly...EXACTLY...what you just did) and throwing lame and unfounded personal comments into the mix until one of us (me? you bet) finally got sick of dealing with an insolent 12 yr old faggot

[pamew]

"throwing lame and unfounded personal comments."

"got sick of dealing with an insolent 12 yr old faggot."

Oh look, my assertion was correct. you ARE a hypocritical pretentious prick.

Also, cry more please, the salty taste of your tears gives me pleasure.

[Verceti1]

if you really think you've won this fair and square, you're as conceited as you are shitty at sustaining any sort of coherent argument. and talk about being a hypocrite or a pretentious prick, your truly woeful litany of shit arguments has shown us both that you fill both of those criteria. to quote the most sorry cunt on youtube 'my work here is done'...say whatever you like, i'm not listening...and by the way...I AM A FUCKING INTELLECT...try and prove me wrong...see if i care dickhead

[pamew]

I think you mean an intellectual, not intellect.

Oh, looks like I just proved you wrong.

You really are making this too easy for me you know.

[Verceti1]

'Intellect: [C] formal a very educated person whose interests are studying and other activities that involve careful thinking' (from Cambridge Online Dictionary)...it's also a noun...nice one tool. once again you not only exhibit your arrogance but also your pathetic understanding of the english language. if you're going to be the pedant, at least get it right. i can't believe i'm still replying to you, you're such a fucking idiot

[pamew]

When was the last time you heard somebody referred to an an intellect rather than an intellectual?

Oh, never? right, because nobody says that.

And you probably keep replying because you're so very trollable.

[Verceti1]

once again, a solid argument based on real empirical evidence...still defying the laws of stupidity

[pamew]

You forgot to Add a period at the end of your comment, but you're obviously a genius so I'm sure it was part of some witty statement that went entirely over my head.

Also, defying the laws of stupidity would make somebody intelligent, surely?

[Verceti1]

well you're the pedant, even if you barely know english. i can't say i'm surprised that you couldn't fathom my simple statement - 'defying the laws of stupidity' - as an insult. i guess you still surprise me. you really have a brillian gift for making yourself look a stupid dickhole

[pamew]

Defying the law of gravity is not taken to mean that one gains a greater gravitational field, it's generally taken to mean quite the opposite.

In a similar fashion, "defying the laws of stupidity" could be taken to insinuate a similar principle.

Also, FYI, I was aware you were trying to insult me, I just found it amusing that you chose to use such an exploitable expression to do it.

"barely know english."

"understand" is a more suitable word, oh exalted one.

[Verceti1]

yeah so gravity and stupidity are two very different things...but i guess you're so retarded you couldn't conceive that 'defying the laws' of stupidity meant that you exceed the limits of conventional stpudity. incidentally, while there are actually laws of gravity, there are no laws of stupidity. to take it literally rather than as an insulting expression simply makes you look even dumber, but by now i've come to expect the unexpected from you.

'oh exalted one'? you're the only one exalting me

[pamew]

@Verceti1

It's rather amusing watching you rant on, you know that right?

[Verceti1]

ironic that you should say that, because i was thinking the exact same thing about you. by the way, england is shit

[Verceti1]

oh gone from backing off to completely failing to comment? i'll take that as your concession....feel free to prove me wrong prick

[Verceti1]

@pamew fucking specky twat

[Verceti1]

go ahead, have your last word...you already lost dickhead

[TheConfusedHippie]

Well done verecti you giant gimp, by arguing about this vid you gave this idiot what he truly wanted...controversy and attention. This vid is a great big plea for attention and by responding to it in the manner in which you did, yours means contradicted your purpose. You fail!!!

[Verceti1]

shut up brian

[TheConfusedHippie]

nice come back gimp, cut much?

[Verceti1]

@TheConfusedHippie alright, either this is brian someone who knows how to access his account...i'm guessing sloth

[pamew]

Calling me a "specky twat" probably would of worked better if I actually wore glasses, you know.

[Verceti1]

@pamew sick one....still a twat at least

[ryebear16]

talk to religion about my boy specter spartain

[TwoSquirtsOfPiss]

I highly suggest you re-evaluate your stance on the very valid reasons people have for being frustrated with the the Bush administration and the ignorant yanks who put them there for 8 years.

It's amazing, but you really are incapable of looking at it from a 180 perspective; being invaded out of paranoia.

[FlyingBurritoMan]

It's called fear.

[BoozyBeggar]

Bill Gates doesn't work on salary, so he and every other extremely rich person isn't figured into those stats. Socialism is teh kool.

[Mjhavok]

The bottom line is that nationalism is stupid. It is OK for everyone to have a mild sentimental feeling toward the country of their origin or residence but beyond that its just stupid. It is principles and qualities we should support and uphold. Freedom of speech, human rights etc. Let's recognise the problem and faults in our respective societies and try to come to a consensus about what we actually want. As rational human beings.

[Mjhavok]

VH - The United Kingdom is a parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy. The queen is head of state. She can't do shit of any worth. Don't get me wrong I still hate it. I also hate the House of Lords. People not elected who can make certain decisions. The monarch and house of lords should be scraped. It's undemocratic.

[Mjhavok]

If you believe in god then you must realise he is the biggest foetus aborter ever.

[Mjhavok]

EDIT:Meant for a previous video. I had both open :-S

[WolfRitter]

Oh I see, my apologies, I misinterpreted what you said. Okay, let's look at two different Republican Candidates. Ron Paul supports isolationism, this means leaving the UN, WTO, NATO, any international organization or treaty, and getting out of Iraq. Now, on the other hand John McCain, wishes to stay in Iraq. There are nuances, you just fail to see them.

[politicomark]

"Lobbyist don't create legislation, for the most part." Seriously? They don't put pen to paper, if that is what you mean. They have to have legally bribed politicians to be on their side to propose and push legislation, that is true. I think you will find most legislation in the US or any country has financial impact of some sort attached to it. Where this is true, it is in the financial interest of someone to be there to influence the outcome.

[politicomark]

In the US lobbying is so bad some industries write verbatim language in actual bills.

[WolfRitter]

Wikipedia is editable by anyone, it's not a reliable source and is only good for finding appropriate sources. So you're saying individuality is a bad thing, that's such an authoritarian thing to say.

[rowsdowersavesus]

I agree with you for the most part (minus the supporting Ron Paul thing) but there is one important factual error here. Homeless people rarely actually choose to be homeless in either your country or mine, and if social programs were the cause of homelessness, you'd find most countries having more homeless per capita than USA. This isn't the case.

[VirtualHolocaust]

i dont think i said that social programs were the cause of homelessness. the social programs we have in place should be able to pick up the homeless if they wanted. The homeless in our country i think is different than other places. In the sense that there is shelters and soup kitchens.

[rowsdowersavesus]

It sounded like you implied that social programs were the cause, but if you didn't, I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Canada's the same way as the U.S., and we have way less homeless people. Australia also has a lot of homeless shelters. All the stats I was able to get, in fact, were attained through homeless shelters.

[rowsdowersavesus]

There really aren't a lot of stats on homelessness. The only ones I can find are for Canada, Australia and the U.S.A. If your theory is true, the U.S.A. should have the least homeless per capita, as it has less social programs, then Australia, then Canada. Looking at the stats I found:

1% of U.S. population is homeless

0.47% of Australian pop.

0.04% of Canadian pop.

So it looks like social programs PREVENT homelessness, based on what little evidence I have.

[VirtualHolocaust]

make a video about it for all i give a fuck. sounds like you are just trying to find a reason to talk shit. so fuck you. americans that talk shit about the american system think they are ahead of the game and say shit like "we need to stay in iraq" when the fucking country is bleeding money. Self hating americans are generally fucking retards that have no idea of the real world and i doubt if they even fucking vote. "oh my vote doesnt matter" bullshit

[Moroccansky]

America is just America stop deluding urself with the idea that somehow European countries are any better. The shit in France for expl is pretty fucked up. Look at the real thing not Michael Moore's movies

[VirtualHolocaust]

yeah no shit you cant even get a grant to go to school anymore in england.

The reason why people argue this way is that there are so many different countries besides the us. So people can say so and so place is better at this. like we arent aware.

[WolfRitter]

You fail, the Republican and Democratic Parties are no such thing, they're more like a coalition of multiple other parties, for example, you can have isolationist morons (Ron Paul) and neocon morons (George W. Bush) in the same party. The whole point of the primaries is to determine which part of the party is more popular and their candidate gets to go for a stint in the secondaries.

[WolfRitter]

You've violated Godwin's Law, your opponent wins this debate by default.

[TheDude0fLife]

America is good if you already have money somehow, but if you're poor, I mean like like minimum wage poor, you're screwed! You will always be, unless you are one of the clever one percent who get lucky and find a loophole like selling weed or becoming a rapper or something. Still, if you're completely down and out, there's always a church thrift store and a restaurant dumpster nearby full of fried chicken! God bless America!

[VirtualHolocaust]

well you work 2 minimum wage jobs and bust your ass you can come up. that idea is the reason why the hood is in such ruins.

[TOMMYfromtheBRONX]

I AGREE 100 % MAN

[Insomniark]

A Scottish Republican *Genius* talking on behalf of Britain... Well i'm English and we have a name for people like "Virtualterror"

he's a FUCKWIT!

[TruthDevours]

GDP (nominal)

US 13 mil

Ru 1 mil

Income Inequality

US 45

Ru 40

The gap between productivity and real wage is at a historical high. And we have the highest rate of child poverty among all 1st world economies.

[VirtualHolocaust]

see we should let the kids work then right? lol

[TruthDevours]

Worked in Temple of Doom.

RP in '08?

"HOLD AWN TO YO POH TAY TOEZ!!!"

[joebot1]

vvvvvvvvvvvery drunkk

shit neeeeeeeeeeegr

[joebot1]

wow, you have fat on your forehead, like akilngon...this is not a troll type comment, mearly an observsartion... soem have said I look like michael Jakson...fuckers...

[sourcemaster]

u phail

[sourcemaster]

And who are the Europeans to define the best fucking place on Earth?

[coaxx]

europeans get off on talking crap about america when really most americans are fucking cool and most europeans are fucking lame.

[sethvicious]

*is

[sethvicious]

most of Europe socialist and liberal , America was meant to be a free market republic, right now our government is run by neo-cons, if we had someone like Ron Paul as commander in chief we would blow every country in the world out of the water in every facet. right now we are pretty shitty when it comes to education and technology , thats because we have let an incompetent government run the show for almost a fucking decade

[VirtualHolocaust]

*golf clap*

[WolfRitter]

You're a fucking moron, Ron Paul is an isolationist, he wants to withdraw from every fucking international group and treaties. We are no longer a completely sulf-sustaining country anymore, we can not survive as we are without those agreements. Would you like to know what happens if we leave the UN? We risk the Chinese or the Russians gaining power and reforming it to suit their needs rather than our own.

[WolfRitter]

Hey douchebags, instead of downrating my comment, why don't you refute it first. Otherwise you come off as some petty little shits who can't stand to be told they're wrong.

[VirtualHolocaust]

it is. prove me wrong.

[VirtualHolocaust]

you know that in england you have to pay for college too? And we arent a democracy we are a republic.

[Mjhavok]

In Scotland you don't have to pay :-D.

[sethvicious]

I cant believe your sticking up for the CURRENT America this much. yea our numbers may be good when it comes to average income and all that shit but cmon! you know how low Ron Paul is nationwide, this country is DUMB! we peaked in the 90's and have been on the decline ever since. we are still the most powerful country in the world but if another neocon gets elected, we wont hold that title anymore. thats how close we are

[Insomniark]

Its called patriotism & Long may it live!

[Crosisborg]

Good pwnage. The guy is no genius. He demonstrates his lack of knowledge with every sentence. His video was good for a laugh in the same way Venomfangx's are. An idiot rant akin to a Monty Python sketch.

[starfishsicko]

Well said! USA ftw! I'm glad you made this video.

[Elganko]

The reason why so many talks about how the US should do business is simply because the choices the US government makes affect our countries too.

And your government just seems to have a tendency to cause problems, I don't see this as the fault of the american public, but Americas politics is nothing less than offensive.

Governments are meant to serve us, not the other way around.

[WolfRitter]

The ending there was a non sequitor. The US' foreign politics work like this:

The welfare of the US of A is primary, followed by NATO & other allied nations, followed by neutral nations, followed by our enemies. This is based on how percieve how the world works, through Maximal Realism. So when you sign up with NATO, tell me.

[Elganko]

Doesn't really touch the subject, but okay.

My opinion is that the US shouldn't try to police the globe when they can barely run their own shit.

[Elganko]

By the way, Sweden is already in NATO if I'm not mistaken. ^^

[WolfRitter]

No, Sweden is maintaining the Policy of 1812, a policy of strict neutrality. It has maintained this policy since after the Napoleonic Wars, through both World Wars and the Cold War.

[WolfRitter]

Tough shit, the best way to serve our national interests is to be the global hegemon, according to maximal realism, this requires that we topple all challengers. This is the reasoning behind Iraq, some people thought Saddam was challenging him, and under maximal realism this would mean other nations would bandwagon with Iraq.

[Elganko]

That's just delusional.

There is no rational basis for argument that maximal realism would mean that other nations would support a dictator in any situation, much less the situation that lead to the war in Iraq.

If anything, through the lens of maximal realism, America can easily be seen as the aggressors, and that is NOT a delusion.

[WolfRitter]

Yes there is, when the United Kingdom didn't answer the challenge that Germany was posing to it as the European Hegemon, under minimal realism we should've seen countries uniting against it, instead we see other countries bandwagoning and becoming fascist governments. It's not until the Axis Powers presented a challenge to the Asian and American Hegemons did we see a coalition forming against them.

[WolfRitter]

We see the same after the Vietnam, we lost badly and were supplanted as the Global Hegemon by the USSR in the mid and lates seventies, we resverse that when they did not crush our challenge in the 80's. Now, you spoke of Iraq, that's a huge misunderstanding of Maximal Realism, not every challenge is a credible challenge and not every percieved challenge is actually a challenge. The current administration is actually a bunch of minimal realists pretending to be maximal realists.

[WolfRitter]

Finally, you seem to make the strawman that I said our military is absolutely needed for intervensionism and challenging other nations. If Vietnam and the Mujahideen prove anything, it's that we can turn our light work over to allies.

[Elganko]

I can't see how it's a strawman argument when it's true.

And why is minimal and maximal realism the only two ways to look at it?

The point is, you're only looking at it from the perspective on America, and you are making it sound like every other country would become terroristsupporters if America hadn't taken that role.

I still haven't gotten a good reason to why America should solely police the world.

[Elganko]

My opinion is that America shouldn't claim itself as the top of the foodchain, it is both arrogant and self-serving, and alot of your politics has lead to strain on a global scale, and quite a few of these situations could easily have been avoided all-together by cooperation with UN for example.

One nations should not be allowed to single-handedly make decisions that affect the rest of us.

[WolfRitter]

Except we are, it's arrogant and self-serving but it's true. As for causing strain, like what? If you're talking about Iraq I can't say anymore than I already have, the current administration is full of morons and there's nothing else to be said. As for making decisions that affect the rest of you, tough titties. Being a global hegemon and having our hands in business all over the world means we can't make decisions without affecting the rest of the world.

[WolfRitter]

It's a strawman argument because I didn't say that it was absolutely necessary for us to use our military all the time, why do you think we sell all this military equipment to Japan, South Korea, and Thailand? We use them as pawns to handle our light work.

[WolfRitter]

I didn't say that maximal and minimal realism were the only ways they work, the Soviets thought that with each conflict both nations become more and more similair, a more powerful nation will affect a weaker nation more and more, and we can see which one won the Cold War because of how they thought politics worked, and both ideas stressed a powerful military.

[WolfRitter]

You're only hearing what you want to hear, note that I said not all challenges are credible or actually challenges to begin with. The Bush Administration percieved Iraq as a threat and reacted, they screwed the pooch in not realizing that Saddam's military was still in ruins and had been for over a decade, and that the American populace can handle any number of dead soldiers, the problem is time, we don't like drawn out wars and after six years we want to go home.

[WolfRitter]

Again, we take the role of World Police because it serves our national interests, it's selfish, but we expect the same out of every country, so tough shit.

[Elganko]

"

My point exactly.

Using other countries as pawns and acting like it would be impossible without America is offensive.

You may kill alot of people, but most of the rebuilding and help for the population is given by other countries.

Sweden for example has soldiers helping with security and voting and many other things in most other countries, you are only interested when it directly benefits you.

[WolfRitter]

Again your making a strawman and a Red herring. I nothing about rebuilding anything. You're going all over the place, if you want to talk about US International policy, that's fine, but stick to the subject.

Why shouldn't we? I don't think we should be helping to rebuild a country unless it benefits or it wants to align with us. The US of America's interests are best served as the hegemon, as such we must preserve that status, and anything that might threaten that needs to be destroyed.

[Elganko]

How can you see this as going off the subject?

America has no problem going to war but they don't want anything to do with the aftermath.

Bottomline is, I stated that American politics are self-centered whilst European politics are designed to benefit everyone.

I sincerely hope that China keeps making progress, if it does, then within the next 60 years, they'll be the top of the food chain, not you, and maybe then you'll get what's coming to you.

[WolfRitter]

First of all, yes we are selfish, we care about the people who are loyal to our Nation above all others, followed by those for whom loyalty to us is secondary to someone else, but I don't see how that's a problem.

[WolfRitter]

Secondly, no, China is running out of resources much too fastly, I suggest you look up the research IEE Japan has been doing. China's going to run out of resources long before they ever reach superpower status, then they're either going to have to bend to our will, start a war of expansion to feed the 'Chinese Horde' (Russia and India won't take too kindly), or their populations will die a slow and painful death of starvation.

[WolfRitter]

Why should we stay if they don't want our help?