Added: 3 years ago
From: nguyen5055
Views: 155,720
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,211)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • where can i find interview with Stoner and Kalashnikov?

    give me a link please

  • @BMW971 The AK and M16 had a one night stand and thus came the HK M416. It can take punishment and have the accuracy of the M16.

  • The AK-47 and M16 have help eachother evolve further trough the years

    M16 has 30round magazines becuase thats what the AK uses,M16 have a bit loser desing because thats why the AK-47 is so reliable(M16/M4/AR-15 can also take a bit of abuse but no as mush as the AK,AKs canbe buried for year and run over with tanks but they will still work)AK developed muzzle breaks and later the AK74 in 5.45x39

    Galil is a AK with a rear M16 peep sight.

    There opposite but they help eachothe develop

  • AK, single shot, rifle scope ultimate killing machine

  • AK is powerful, fairly accurate if handled well, cheap and reliable.

    M16 is somewhat powerful and accurate.

  • ak all the way go russha you can yous the ak with out looking after it >.< m 16 :p

  • The AK can practically shoot no matter HOW you treat it (well, let's stay REALISTIC now shall we?). Things such as sand, water, mud, and even getting run over by a Humvee (NOT tank) won't affect it's capability of shooting. It may lose accuracy, but it still shoots.

  • @BMW9871 They haven't made a rifle yet that is completely impervious to sand and mud. The AK,however, is more tolerant to sand and mud then other rifles though.

  • u guys are wrong for 1 reason. power vs accuracy in guns. accuracy wins. both will kill you with one shot place in the right place. and its better to be accurate because u wont have much recoil and u will have a greater chance of hitting ur target. the only thing better about the ak 47 is that it is cheap and extremely reliable. RELIABLE IS THE BEST THING ABOUT IT

  • @noelmejia19 no ofense dude but this aint Call of Duty, it's REAL LIFE. And besides their both bullet weapons so either way they're gonna kill YOU for sure.

  • @TheChauChannel i kno its not i shoot guns including both of these. recoil isnt fake and both guns will kill u with a shot and the ak will shot almost always through any thing making it reliable u can be underwater and it would probaly shoot

  • @noelmejia19 why you think one bullet will do the job? 5,56 doesnt necessary take a guy down but 7,62 will surely break bones eaven if you have class 3 bulletproof on

  • Swap the calibers and see which one is throwing itself around. Besides one is an automatic rifle and one is a pistol.

  • Common sense m16 designed for control and accuracy 5.56 can reach 1000 yards with fine accurate groups with the 7.62 the farthest I've heard of was 700 yds with consistant grouping. at those ranges velocity and penetration is reduced dramatically giving the higher velocity projetile the cutting edge. both great rifles personaly I would take the rifle that would save my life.

  • Accuracy test notice windage adj on ak

  • AK47 - Unleash 30 rounds with a swamp. Smack someone's head across the head with a spare mag and load that mag in and unleash another 30 rounds.

    M16- Pick people off quickly from a distance with a sniper scope attachment.

  • @crossvariation this is not COD

  • @MrDip02 I know its not COD. Since when in COD were you able to smack a guy across the head with a magazine and load it in. And what part of the M16 that I said is inaccurate? U.S soldiers attach scopes, including sniper scopes, to take out insurgents from long distance. Last time I checked, soldiers prefer scopes over iron sights in the battlefield

  • @crossvariation the way you said and yes .223 is good for hunting (i know it's 5.56x45 but very similar calibers and people love .223) but define long rang

  • @MrDip02 Long range-- I don't have any numbers since its a broad term. But according to all the articles I read, "several hundred meters". I'm not a soldier so I wouldn't know how to represent that with real life examples.

  • ive never shot an m16, ar15, or m4 but i shot the ak a few times and i really like it, its easy to strip and clean and shoot too

  • i vote ak-47. cus i love it

  • and anyone who says it's not powerful enough, let's shoot you with a 5.56 and you let me know how that works out. (y)

    oh, and i've personally seen people put a nice solid hole through a spent .50 bmg at 100 yards using an AK-47, so both rifles are fairly accurate, and powerful, just one is more tolerable, and easy to use, and the other is more accurate over better range, but less tolerable, more complexly constructed, and MUCH easier to sight a target

  • @INKOFORANGE An airgun can kill you, but nobody carries them into battle. I wouldn't want to be hit by any caliber. It's not a question of being able to kill, it's a question of how reliably they can kill.

  • @INKOFORANGE Ah, but hititng spent .50 BMG shells consistently with every shot? Cuz even a crappy clock can strike 12 o' clock once a day. I would never refer to the Ak-47 as an "accurate" weapon aside from a rare few variants and the occaisional "luck of the draw" Ak coupled with an extremely good shooter.

  • the m16 has changed since vietnam greatly. The A4 model is MUCH more reliable than it was 30 or 40 years ago. And what's more, back then a LOT of american troops would discharge whole magazines out of panic, and attempt to tamper with the weapon to reduce the rate of fire...so it's not fair to say the m16 wasn't a good weapon, it's less TOLERABLE than the AK-47, you can't bury it in mud and start shooting, but it's still a good rifle if you respect it.

    Only a poor workman blames his tools

  • in russia whe buy 2 ak-47 instead of one m16 for the same price.

    thats how to make every russian happy.

    and as always have a nice day.

  • The AK47 is reliable and powerful, but the M16 is more accurate. I prefer the AK47.

  • Or you get the AR in a different caliber, such as the 6.8 SPC. Accuracy and range of the AR, while hitting much harder than the 5.56.

  • his last lame is stoner hahahahahaha nice

  • The "Standard Rifle Bullet" is a 7.62x54mmR right?

  • if u want something powerful then go with an ak47

    if u want something that is accurate go with the m16

    i tell u the truth both guns are good in there own ways

  • @ricardomena45 what do you think of the l85a2

  • @ricardomena45 No if you want something powerful, very accurate, low recoil, and reliable then go with the M16. The tumble effect of the 5.56 creates a cavity as large or larger than a 7.62x39. That's why the Russians switched to 5.45x39.

  • AK-47 IS THE BEST GUN IN THE FUKING WORLD...FUCK CAPITALISM AND FACK YOUR GAY AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @alexxx759 cause ur country is probably just soooooo much better....lmao..

  • @beefcakes42 is better haa why there are to much homelees then hah

  • Comment removed

  • @beefcakes42 DID YOU GOT WHAT I MEAN HAHAHAHHAHAH

  • lol idk what ur talking about

  • @beefcakes42 just let it go brother i will choose an ak47

  • @TheMrkukulcan i dont really care wat ud choose i like them both for different reasons, its just these idiots talkin trash about other countries on a fucking GUN COMPARISON video....

  • @alexxx759 i love how u Europeans insult the usa. we dont get offened by uneducated like ur self ur countrys evil for making our country watch the royal wedding

  • any AK any day!!!

  • I like both, but in combat I'd like the M16/M4. Accuracy, and stopping power. Don't hate on the round, it'll tear you apart on the inside.

  • @THE13EARJEW A lot of stuff about the 5.56x45 is exaggerated. It can do nasty wounds, but other times it won't.I have a report by an army doctor where he says the 5.56x45 would do wounds similar to that of a .22 LR. It would pass right through the chest of people without any type of tumbling or fragmenting.

  • Comment removed

  • AK SUCKS

  • I love how they didn't do a test on reliability. That would make the M16 look like shit.

  • @Thejeter5770 It's a terrible documentry all together. I've shot AK's to 200 yards and they do a lot better then that. The guy was a terrible shot or his sight adjustments were off. Plus they kept emphasizing far too much on the M16's reliability problems in Vietnam, rather then judging it by its reliability today.

  • Whats LT stand for ?

  • @ranger0504 you call yourself "ranger" but dont know what LT stands for ? 

  • @SuperMachinegunner obviously, when you are young you have never seen power "ranger".

  • @ranger0504 i used to watch power ranger, but even they knew what LT stands for do you at least now what PFC CPL or SGT stands for ?

  • @SuperMachinegunner i do not know whats pfc stand for cause in my country we only have 1 private rank. CPL stand for corporal, SGT stand for sergeant. I'm pretty sure when you are new to the rank you do not know all this right.

  • @ranger0504 when youre watching videos about military weapons you should know ranks, what country you from ?

  • @SuperMachinegunner singapore.....

  • @ranger0504 another country i havnt been to yet, i think i should travel more

  • @ranger0504 LT is lieutanent

  • Man, to see Mikhail Kalashnikov and Eugene Stoner, the designers of the two most deadliest rifles sit next to each other!, sends chills up my back. ._.

  • Aye i met with some RAF Intel guys at the Waddington airshow, he tells me with the AK, you could with controlled fire hit targets at 400m pretty good

  • WAW cutscene...but yes this is something totally different called...REAL LIFE

  • I love both these guns in real life and in cod

  • If you want to conquer and invade M16

    If you want to defend and protect Ak 47

    look at whos using each weapon...

  • I think the m16 is better!!

  • fuck that im sticking with my mosin nagant :P

  • it depends on a soldier who shoots, both weapons are good....

  • @sergeikozin47 UR WRONG. Here's y. Power is no difference between these 2 guns. both will kill u when placed in the right spot. the m16 has better accuracy meaning it will hit ur target unlike the ak 47. no point of power if u cant hit ur target. the only thing the ak 47 has is reliability. RELIABILITY IS THE ONLY PERK

  • @noelmejia19 say what you wanna say...

  • Whats the fat guys name

  • @JoseppiTV Eric Cartmen

  • Plus, the reenactment looked pathetic. Hardly similar to what it was really like. You'd think with all those Vietnam vets they had there to interview, they'd make a more realistic set. Well, it really doesn't matter.

  • The NVA and Viet Cong may have used a few Russian or Czechoslovakian AK-47s, but the majority of the variants issued were Chinese Type-56. The 56 may be a copy of the AK, but you never know, it could have maintenance a little differently than the original Soviet model. So technically, this isn't the BEST comparison of the Kalashnikov and the AR's performances.

  • Im sticken to the THOMPSON and the PPSH-41

  • i preffer the m16

  • AK47 is better

  • @3Runner95SRB So if you had the choice you would rather be shot with the M16 and feel the 5.56 tumble and fragment inside you creating a larger wound than a 7.62x39 and a better chance to hit a major organ or artery?

  • @bazookajoethethird Read what Dr.Martin Fackler, a military surgeon, said about the M16 round in Vietnam. He said the wounds it produced were very minimal. I can send you the link if you want.

  • @esh325 I don't mind being proved wrong but according to every other source it has excellent killing capability. Send me the link.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • AR ROCKS!!!

  • dont know about the accuracy, had absolutely no trouble hitting a man sized target at 400 yards, at this distance locating an enemy soldier in a military uniform is very difficult, shooting at him is stupid, if you miss, he will probably call in artillery, so the ak is accurate enough

  • To bad they compare the m16 with some cheapass Chinese Type trololol AK47...

  • @durgymp The one in the video didn't have hooded front sights like a Chinese AK-47. And if it were Chinese, it would still be a good rifle. I've fired lots Chinese AK's and they are quality rifles.

  • reason the ak didnt hit the paper was because he didnt have it set to 200 metres. it wasnt even 100metres. i love both guns but that was a silly mistake.

  • @joshkkv Yes, it is really a retarded mistake for a supposed "expert" or it was intentionally done.

  • @esh325 id say intentionally.

  • i hate when i come on a video and all the comments i see are replys

  • It's funny how Americans call the (AUSTRIAN) Glock "plastic junk", yet they love the (AMERICAN) AR-15 despite it having several plastic parts. Pure coincidence? I don't think so.

  • Comment removed

  • @Keichwoud357 because the glock is a cheap plastic piece of shit and most of them shoot a small piece of shit round, best pistol of all time, the browning .45, reliable and simple and shoots a good round

  • @demon07nd Are you saying that the Glock is not simple?

  • @Keichwoud357 no i m saying that the browning is super simple, u give that gun to a five year old and some vague directions and they can take it a part and put it back together easy

  • @demon07nd You're very ignorant. I suggest you fire a Glock and do more research before running your mouth. I have fired a Glock and while they aren't my favorite pistol, they are very reliable and I would bet my life on them. They aren't a pos. You can get a Glock 21 which fires .45 acp. It's not called a, "Browning .45" It's called a 1911.

  • @esh325 first of all i have shot glocks, i call it a browning .45, because there are companies that have copied the 1911, and i trust my life to my browning 1911, i have been around many .45s and i have never seen one jam, while i have seen a glock jam

  • @demon07nd I've had plenty of 1911's malfunction on me. Every gun can jam. I have two Glocks a 26 and 21 and they have yet to jam.

  • @esh325 well first when was the 1911 made, and what company made it, i have had plenty of glocks jam on me and never a .45

  • @demon07nd I had a Colt 1911 in 9mm jam really bad on me with regular ammo. I had a Colt WW2 reproduction jam on me with regular ammo. The first 1911 I ever shot was a compact colt or some sort and that jammed with factory ammo. Springfield armory I had choked on some reloads. A WW2 remington rand I had choked on some reloads. Nothing is perfect. My glock hasn't jammed yet, but that doesn't mean it can't.

  • @esh325 well did y clean them? you have to clean them once in a while, i have never had one jam case closed

  • @demon07nd I cleaned and lubed most of them regularly.

  • @esh325 ok i have never had one jam me, i just like the 1911 a lot better then all most all other pistols,

  • @Keichwoud357 You obviously have NO idea what you are talking about. Us Americans love the Glocks. EVERY gun fanatic in America loves Glocks! It is just like the M16. American soldiers in Vietnam called the M16 the "toy gun" because it is made with mostly armalite plastics and has few metal pieces. But the M16 caught on and became world renown.

  • @bazookajoethethird Not true the ak47 is responsible for the deaths of Millions its cheap and reliable, ak47 frames will soon out produced and out perform the m16 frame the m4 was a good gun but it will not be able to out perform the ak47.

  • @MrGkid5000 I know the AK-47 is the most widely used weapon. But what are you saying is not true? The M4 out performs the AK-47 in CQC, range, and accuracy. The M16 and M4's are reliable weapons, that's a fact. The M16 was not but since the 5.56 has been changed from M193 ball to 5.56 NATO and the barrel has been chromed it is unlikely to jam. However the M4 cannot out perform the RK-95 TP, the best AK-47 variant.

  • @bazookajoethethird Yes it can. The ak-47 is the only weapon that can compete with the next generation guns, scar/acr/xm8. M16, and the m4 are not fail safe weapons, especially for the U.S where we go to other continents to fight were they have climates that are not designed for these weapons. The 7.56 round has a range of 500yards while the 5.56 has a range of 380 yards. accuracy depends wildly on the shooter, all of it depends on the shooter and our rival armies training.

  • @MrGkid5000 You don't know anything COD kid. The AK-47 fires a 7.62x39. It has a range of 500 yards. The 5.56 NATO round has a range of 1000 meters. the AK-47's barrel wabbles on every shot and the 7.62x39 is alot less accurate and the rear sight is not close to the user also effecting accuracy. The first M16 would not shoot in cold climates, now they are able to go anywhere and fire without fail. The "tumble" of the 5.56 creates a larger cavity than the 7.62X39=easier kill shot. SEARCH IT!

  • @bazookajoethethird Yeah a 5.56x45 can fly to 1000 yards, but the majority of people using it are never going to shoot that far. Is your eyesight good enough to see an 1000 yard target with a M16? Let's see you post a video of you hitting an 1000 target with a M16.

  • @esh325 OF COURSE NOBODY SHOOTS THAT FAR. I'm just stating the facts.

  • @bazookajoethethird you are fucking retarded you just are completely retarded im ashamed to even say i looked at your retarded comment go kill yourself just kill yourself

  • @MrDip02 What? I am right about everything. Please tell me what the hell you are so mad about you fucking COD kid you don't know anything do your homework before you talk. I can show you how stupid you are if you tell me what I am "wrong" about.

  • @bazookajoethethird everything you're fact are just horribly retarded and inaccurate

  • @bazookajoethethird every gun barrel flexes EVERY just some more than others also the 7.62x39 as a bigger and thicker bullet making the damage ten times more and bigger bullets travel farther than smaller bullets especially knowing the 5.56x45 has less of a powder charge and a smaller bullet ALL bullets can achieve the range of 1000 even a .22LR but not effectively the the ak-47 is capable of hitting things at 400 yards yes less accurately but if you are a good shot its easily possible but

  • but who would shoot an assault rifle at that range and since the ak-47 is 10 times more durable it makes it more superior and it's cheap and if it you need to some reason field strip it the ak-47 is easier and faster light weight does not really matter and if the m-16 was SO much Superior others would not make so many variants of it and knowing the that marines have bullet proof armor the 5.56x45 would not be as painfull to be hit by than the 7.62x39 the 7.62x39 can brake ribs 5.56 cant

  • @MrDip02 You fucking idiot. You have never heard of ballistics have you? "uhh the 7.62x39 is bigger so it is more powerful." Stupid, look up what the tumble effect is, the 5.56 creates a larger cavity oops you don't know what that means...when you shoot someone with a 5.56 it makes a bigger hole in them than a 7.62x39 PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER ME WITH YOUR IDIOTIC THOUGHTS ABOUT THE 5.56 UNTIL YOU LOOK UP THE FACTS!!! Your on the internet. LOOK IT UP!!!

  • @bazookajoethethird the 7.62x39 hollow points would create a bigger cavity the 7.62x39 have thicker bullets meant to do more damage as in it could kill someone behind a wall the 5.56 was meant to fragment that's why it makes a bigger cavity and the 7.62 hollow point would do more damage than that but the only problem is since the 5.56 bullets were made for fragments it would not drop someone using bullet proof armor the 7.62x39 will they would survive but like i said it would brake ribs

  • @MrDip02 Ok an easy way to end this, the cavity from the 5.56 and 7.62x39 are about the same size...

  • @bazookajoethethird hahah fine it's the same if the 7.62 is a hollow point

  • @MrDip02 You don't know shit. Full Metal Jacket 5.56 NATO easily defeats body armor that's what it was DESIGNED FOR. To go through Soviet helmets at 500 yards. M855 green tips easily go through armor. They gave up stopping power with the lighter XM193 Vietnam era round that would tumble more reliably but didn't have enough penetration or accuracy. A slow 7.62 x 39 will not penetrate common body armor in usage. Go back to COD or shoot a real gun.

  • @THEKINGOFMETROPOLIS i own guns retard -__- 

  • Comment removed

  • and the 5.56 was meant to cleanly fire through enemies the 7.62 was meant to blow massive holes into enemies

  • @bazookajoethethird im not saying the m-16 is shit it's still good but your facts are fucking stupidly inaccurate and the m-14 is better than the m-16

  • @MrGkid5000 you must be fucking retarded. first of all what the fuck is the 7.56 round and anyways 5.56 can reach out 1000 yards while the 7.62x39 round can get out to 500 but not really in an ak-47 that most terrorists group use and talking about skill of the shooters a lot of enemies of the united states have less training than american shooters

  • @TheEskimo21 No the akm frane of the ak-47 which is the most accurate can far surpass 1000 yards. it fires a 7.52 round. And before you randomly jump into a conversation how about you listen to both sides you fucking idiot. We were talking about gun frames, and the bullets they shoot. Are you fucking stupid american rivals such as Korea/Russia/china, they use the ak-47 frame weither it be the RKP or the AKM, and they train from the age of avrg minors.

  • @bazookajoethethird well i guess it matters what bullet you use for the 5.56

  • @bazookajoethethird but you're right about most just not the whole ak-47s part i guess

  • I prefer M16...hehehe

  • to Russian: что б там не говорили про ак-47, практика показывает совсем другое. Даже в Ираке американцы бросали свои ультрапродвинутые пушки и брали Калашников. Ак-47 и АК-47М самые продвинутые автоматы в мире, чему доказательсвто любовь и предпочтение всех военных всего мира !!!

  • Comment removed

  • Here is my preference. AK: Big Bullet. Lots of Kinetic energy. Drops targets faster. Easy Gun. No jamming. Simple. M16: Low recoil. Different firing modes. Faster shooting.

    Solution: AK+M16= AKM-63

  • the m16 is a bad joke look wise, the ak47 is an absolute tank

  • @weatherallc05 5.56 isnt that much small compared to 7.62 and its also fast more accurate and the m16 has more fire rate. the main reason why ar15 or m16 or whateva beatup the cheap ak is because ak is so unaccurate and so slow rate of fire compared to ar15

    i rather have two 5.56 bullets on my enemy and not one 7.62 bullet on the air

  • @weatherallc05 sure if you want to miss me about 15 times and me shotting you about 27 times then yeah go ak

  • btw guys dont comment on this video if u bring any game reference in. seriously dont, it pisses people off

  • @weatherallc05 Ak47 is better than M16 on CoD because its fully automatic!

  • @smanks12 fair dos

  • @smanks12 Yeah i agree but the ak47 shoots like a fn fal on semi but a m16 has 3 round burst on semi m16 is the best assult rifle

  • Even though they are communist, there is no denial of the effective killing power behind the AK-47, its just unfortunate that they could not do with their economy what they could with their assault rifles. O well, I guess when you take the power from the people and give it to bureaucrats in Moscow then you get problems.

  • 8:00 he starts using his friend for cover. O_O

  • @Bingbling16 why not?

  • ак 47 рулит м16 гавно

  • I have business to tend to. I'll continue this tomorrow.

  • So what you're using as an example of communism is actually not communism? So you really don't know what it is?! Wow. Well let me show you democracy. The Athenians went out to an island known as Melos. The Melosians begged for peace, but Athens made an example of them. The melosians did nothing to the athenians. The athenians killed all the men of age and sold the rest of the people into slavery. It's part of the peloponesian war.

  • You're spinning history to support your capitalist beliefs. = )

  • @StiftikBoliovich

    I think your Trotskyite psychological makeup is doing the reverse--but more transparent and going against common sense

  • @AnakNangTupa Show me an example. What is going against common sense? How am I doing the reverse? Explain it to me. I'll listen.

  • @StiftikBoliovich

    You didn't get the metaphor? that's you're problem.

  • @AnakNangTupa What metaphor is that? I see no metaphor.

  • @StiftikBoliovich

    You beginning to sound like Lucy Arnaz--always confused.

    You'll figure it out--in no time.

  • @AnakNangTupa Hm perhaps. I suppose it's easier to argue by defacing one's character rather than by using actual facts. If there is a metaphor there it's about Trotskyism being obviously impractical. That's not true and you have no right to say that. You haven't seen it. You have no proof to support that. In fact if any government is practical it's socialism. Trotsky was murdered by Stalinists. So.

  • @StiftikBoliovich warned: "That's not true (about Communism) and you have no right to say that"

    Spoken like a true Communist, huh Ivan?

  • @AnakNangTupa Well it's never been practiced. So. I mean and what you're saying is spoken by a truly fearful man. Distrusting of his fellow man. You've shown to me over this entire argument I can't really argue with you. Can't argue with an ignorant person after all. So I'm going to be the better man. Goodbye Anak.

  • @StiftikBoliovich weaseled: "Well it's never been practiced" (communism)

    You Communists have this common excuse that 'real Communism' has never been tried and true--then demonize those who criticize & oppose it.

    What we analytical thinkers & other smart observers previewed so far, on the many attempts to push this horrible ideology are stunningly ugly--millions had already been killed, nations collapsed, just to make it happen.

    So, no thanks, let's keep Communism a theory not a reality.

  • It's a funny story. Vladimir Ulyanov, the one you know as Lenin, did nothing for the revolution. Trotsky fought the russian revolution. He founded most modern military organizations in russia today. He was the first Kommissar. He was a real Kommissar. He didn't shoot people who retreated. He inspired them. With speeches. He inspired them to fight harder in WWI than any other russian soldiers had. They were deserters. They would've been shot had he not intervened.

  • The constitution says your government can tax you. Why shouldn't they? I admit the taxes should absolutely be used properly and not embezzled. However it's what makes a strong country. It's why the Union winning the Civil War was a good thing. The Confederates, more along a right wing persons line of thinking, would've set up a confederacy. The country would've been so weak. No ability to tax. People should pay back their society for what it's done for them.

  • @StiftikBoliovich

    Amendment 16 was an illegal act on the US Constitution by the few powers that be, at that time, that should have been passed by 2/3rds States majority--but, again the liberal left (your Komrades) manipulated it to be included to become law in the amendments, through deception, to be at least the foot at the door to Socialism

  • @AnakNangTupa Lol my comrades? I don't see the democrats as my comrades. Eh they have saved your country on a few occasions. Big business certainly hasn't done anything for it. Nothing too good anyways. Prosperity isn't worth the cost of human lives. Al Gore is one of the most ridiculous individuals I have ever heard. Although he did win the popular vote in the 2000 election. He lost the electoral. Which is ridiculous. You definitely have some phobia of leftists. As if we cause every problem.

  • @StiftikBoliovich : "You definitely have some phobia of leftists. As if we cause every problem"

    From Marx to Stalin, from Castro to Che, From East Berlin to the collapse of the USSR, why did they all failed?

    You see Utopia is just a figment of one Communist mind's imagination--cause it will never work.

  • @AnakNangTupa Well you must realize they've never founded a Utopia. Lenin was shot. Marx never even was the leader of a country. The CIA has very effectively put down communism. McCarthyism put it down in the US. Fear mongerers and selfish individuals have put down the revolution. Stalin has influenced many regimes. Which is a sad thing. He was a fascist. Communism would either have to be practiced in a small isolated community or in a worldwide system.

  • @AnakNangTupa Is it a myth? I believe that the US hasn't allowed room for Utopia to be founded. When the February Revolution occured US troops were deployed to Russia. Why? The Tsars were very oppressive. The communists preached power to the people. The US should've sympathized with that. They've always put down communism. It's taught to be this evil thing. It really isn't. Giving a jobless man a job isn't evil. Perfect equality isn't evil. Utopia doesn't profit the rich.

  • @StiftikBoliovich cluless: "Perfect equality isn't evil.

    So who lives in sheer luxury in Cuba's 'Utopia'? I believe his name is Fidel and his brother Raul.

    And have you heard how Mao lives during his reign of terror?

    So the communist politburo party bigwigs lives in a tiny cramp apartments too?

    Equality my ass!

  • @AnakNangTupa Eh man lol. You actually think communism has been practiced in this world? On the surface of this planet? No. The children of the soviet and the soviet itself were in fact socialist countries. Money still existed. Money was created so business owners couldn't screw each other. Communism is an internationalist belief. Stalin practiced a nationalistic socialism. Therefore he was actually a Nazi. Thus is so for Fidel and all of Stalin's successors.

  • @StiftikBoliovich asks: "You actually think communism has been practiced in this world? "

    You're too slow--how many times have I reiterated that Utopia will not work cause it's a myth?

    Ergo, Sherlock, that translates that communism has never happened and it'll never happen based on that fact! 

    only communist boneheads like you exists, and just keep trying to make it work and failing for centuries.

  • @AnakNangTupa Haha. I didn't know you were God? So because you say it will never work it will never work? Someday I'm going to get to throw you a very smug look. And you my friend are going to be eating your words. It has never been practiced. Nor has an actual attempt been made. You've seen a wave of two step method revolutions. Trotskyism holds high the idea of permanent revolution. Two step method requires a short period of dictatorship of the proletariot. That's the failure. The ruse.

  • @StiftikBoliovich Yells: "Power to the People" (before and during the 'struggle')

    After the 'struggle" Like Fidel, and Mao, they sequestered all the mansions and lives on them, with young women of course!!

    Form one oligarch to another---that's how Communism works!!

  • @AnakNangTupa Haha you are a funny bastard. I suppose living in the US makes you cynical. You suspect that compassion comes with ulterior motives. I can't speak for those who have taken the name of communism in the past. I know myself as wanting less pay for politicians. The right to bare arms should be allowed. I'll never take that away from people. It shouldn't be taken away. I believe in a government that actually serves its people. You can say all you wish. Men have fought and died for this.