Awesome/Funny NS quotes (not your own quotes, please)

[Mike the Progressive]

Incidentally, "rise damn you. rise!!!" also sums up Mike's sex life.

I hate you guys so damn much.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

I hate you guys so damn much.

Mike weeps, tears falling down his face as he tightly grips his loose noodle. He had done all he could, but nothing happened. Nothing. He stares down, sobbing as he screamed downwards. "Rise, damn you! Rise!!!"

But it was unmoving, uncaring, unresponsive. Not even a weak twitch. Such is life, after all.

Mike looks up, face pale and tear-streaked. "This has never happened before." he swears weakly, looking at his reflection in the mirror.

[Coffee Cakes]

I hate you guys so damn much.

Mike weeps, tears falling down his face as he tightly grips his loose noodle. He had done all he could, but nothing happened. Nothing. He breajs down, sobbing as he screamed downwards. "Rise, damn you! Rise!!!"

But it was unmoving, uncaring, unresponsive. Not even a weak twitch. Such is life, after all.

Mike looks up, face pale and tear-streaked. "This has never happened before." he swears weakly, looking at his reflection in the mirror.

Now that's just evil.

Also, Gidge had thoughts, too:

you know. There IS viagra

[Mike the Progressive]

I hate you guys so damn much.

Mike weeps, tears falling down his face as he tightly grips his loose noodle. He had done all he could, but nothing happened. Nothing. He breajs down, sobbing as he screamed downwards. "Rise, damn you! Rise!!!"

But it was unmoving, uncaring, unresponsive. Not even a weak twitch. Such is life, after all.

Mike looks up, face pale and tear-streaked. "This has never happened before." he swears weakly, looking at his reflection in the mirror.

Fuck you, bro hate u so much right now.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Mike weeps, tears falling down his face as he tightly grips his loose noodle. He had done all he could, but nothing happened. Nothing. He breajs down, sobbing as he screamed downwards. "Rise, damn you! Rise!!!"

But it was unmoving, uncaring, unresponsive. Not even a weak twitch. Such is life, after all.

Mike looks up, face pale and tear-streaked. "This has never happened before." he swears weakly, looking at his reflection in the mirror.

Fuck you, bro hate u so much right now.

Oh, was that transcript meant to be private?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

"This"? What "This"? How the fuck is that a "This"? That is not a "This". That is a "lolwut?" at best.

This.

[Fvaarniimar]

Expressed, as all love should be, by regularly placing the anus directly in front of the face.

Mine do that. Frequently.

[Alyakia]

Give me one reason NOT to be condescending towards most of Africa.

Basic historical context?
Funnily enough, this is the exact line of thought that justified the original colonization and exploitation of Africa.
"Why shouldn't we be condescending and imperialistic towards Africa? They're just a bunch of stupid, heathen tribals! They need Jesus and to be relieved of all their burdensome land and resources!" has now become "Why shouldn't we be condescending and imperialistic towards Africa? They're just a bunch of stupid, fractious morons who can't govern themselves because of how much we fucked them all up for centuries by screwing around with their ethnic distributions and the borders of their states! They need foreign (coughWHITEcough) militaries to tell them what to do, because they're clearly too intrinsically stupid to know for themselves!"

It's a pretty evident fact that much of Africa is an impoverished,

Almost like it was in the West's interest to keep Africa poor during colonization, and felt no responsibility to help them afterwards!
But hey, we all know how pretty much all Americans were rich and prosperous by 1850-1860 or so, so that's a totally valid comparison for you to make!

diseased

That's partly just a function of the climate, you know.

war-torn shithole run by petty dictators and warlords, or heavily-corrupt and failing democratic governments, which is the main reason why so much petty dictators and warlords exist there in the first place.

Yeah, it's not like the chaos and shitty planning of the decolonization phase (or the initial colonization phase, for that matter) had anything to do with anything. Or the continuous Western/Soviet support of various warlords and rebel movements during the Cold War mattered anywhere. Or the massive numbers of corporate oil/diamond/gold/agriculture companies trying to take advantage of fragile new democratic states to turn them into neocolonial colonies (generally ruled by a pliable local fellow they could install as dictator), in the process funding or even creating militias and rebel groups wholesale to support them on the ground (frequently trained and augmented augmented by British/French/Dutch/Belgian/Saffie mercs) ever did anything.
Nope. None of that mattered.
But hey, America was in great shape 50-60 years after WE were decolonized, right? We didn't have rebelling provinces, or ridiculously common rights abuses, or a civil war on our doorsteps or anything! We did everything bloodlessly and perfectly, always!

Those people have had what, 50 or so years of independence

Some have had 50, most have had less. Some have effectively had far, far less.

to get their shit together since they had such a problem with European colonialism, and yet much of these former colonies are now in a worse state than the Brits, Frenchmen, Belgians and whatnot left them.

Because hundreds of years of systematic and horrific abuse (in numerous cases) can easily be cancelled out in a few decades or so, especially when the very states you're decrying were practically constructed to be dysfunctional. And if they're not cancelled out, well, sorry, black people, but you had your fucking chance and you blew it! Back to the rubber plantation, unless you want to be light a hand!

The Africans could have set aside their differences

Just like whites in now developed countries, who are and have always been so good at setting aside differences bloodlessly.
Like the Germans did with the Jews, or the US did with the Native Americans, or how Britain dealt with Indian rebellions, or how the French dealt with the Vietnamese, or how the Belgians treated the Congo, or how the Dutch treated the Indonesians...

and used their colonial legacy to establish their countries as developed, civilized nations,

Right, that's really easy when your country is split roughly into into (at least!) two groups who don't know anything about each other, don't speak the same language, don't worship the same gods, don't look alike (preventing easy population mixing), neither having any sort of democratic experience whatsoever...and oh, by the way, one group was openly and arbitrarily favored by the local colonizers and got special privileges (a la certain tribes in the Congo), so everybody is a bit pissed off at them, to say the least.
Yeah! There's tons of common ground to build on there! That's a reasonable expectation! Just like how the Yugoslavs set aside their differences!

but instead the lot of them

Yes, every African country is an unrepentant shithole! Shitholes, the lot of them!
SILENCE, FOR A EUROPEAN WHITE HAS SPOKEN!
COWER IN JUDGEMENT, YOU ETHNICS!

seem to have reverted back to their petty tribal rivalries

Judging from context, I'm interpreting "petty tribal rivalries" here as "actual conflicts with actual rationales and causes behind them that I can't be bothered to actually understand or look into in any way".

and are busy slaughtering each other in pointless civil wars

What seems pointless to you obviously doesn't seem pointless to them. Your own ignorance as to African conflicts doesn't necessarily translate to everyone else being as ignorant as you are.
If they were pointless, they wouldn't be fighting, obviously. As you're evidently a comfy non-African with obviously no specific information on anything you're talking about (but you do have the odd belief you have the right, if not the obligation, to pass judgement on the entire continent by virtue of...your whiteness? Probably), it may behoove you to actually learn why those conflicts and civil wars are happening, instead of dismissing it all as "blacks are stoopid and love to fight each other because they just do".
And don't stat whining about how that's not your argument, because we both know that'd be a lie.

rather than building their nations.

Not easy when their countries are arbitrarily created relics that don't reflect actual tribal or national divides in any way, shoving massive numbers of divided and unfamiliar ethnic groups together into one state (with borders that were almost uniformly suited to Europeans sensibilities, instead of any sort of national national divide - you'll note very few successful Euro nations ever had to deal with that) with no framework for how they'd ever get along in a coherent state, with literally .

Congo,

The victim of the exact colonial amalgamation and consolidation I've mentioned above, coupled with an absolutely horrific phase of colonial administration that in no way was concerned for the welfare of the natives beyond using them as effective slave labor. Belgium has not supported or aided the DRC in any way pre or post colonialism, and the entire country has essentially been left to fend for itself. The country is composed of a ridiculous number of nations and tribes with no ties to each other, no infrastructure, and no reason to even be a single state. That's on Belgium for shitty planning, not the Africans for having to live with it.

Sierra Leone,

Whose conflict can be traced in massive part to De Beers' exploitation of the country, DIMINCO's funding of pro-De Beers rebel movements and antigovernment militias, and overt participation in co-opting the S-L government under Siaka Stevens and beyond in order to effectively turn the whole country into a neo-diamond-mining colony.

Liberia,

Again, a conflict due massively to the intervention of foreign diamond mining companies and the blood diamond trade (I also hypothesize/suspect some undue involvement in local governmental policies [IE the corruption scene]from the Western shipping industry as well, given that Liberia is perhaps the world's most famous shipping registration tax haven, but that's more difficult to prove. It does, however, make a kind of logical sense).
And who buys blood diamonds, making the entire industry profitable for conglomerates like De Beers?
I'll give you a hint - it isn't the local populace. They just get to be the slave workforce for the anti/pro-government militias, mining these diamonds for...De Beers!

Nigeria,

Victim of the British shoving a massively Muslim/North African population in the North together with a massively Christian/black population in the South and expecting them to play nice. You'll note all those European countries you tout as examples of successful modernization never really had to deal with a foreign power imposing that, and the Euro countries that did, like Yugoslavia and Belgium...haven't worked out so well (Belgium essentially being a failed state when it comes to Flemish/Walloon cooperation).
Oh, and also, Shell is in Nigeria big time, and has also been ridiculously obvious in how much money they throw around there - hell, they even have local militias to go around beating up and killing people who don't like them (check the legal records for Kiobel vs. Royal Dutch Shell on that one)!
But I'm sure they're not one of the reasons the government is so corrupt and dysfunctional. No, sir.

Rwanda,

The exact same thing as the Congo (which makes sense, given that it was administered as part of the Congo area under Belgium). The Belgians, funnily enough, actually pretty much created the Hutu/Tutsi divide - before colonization (and even during), there was a ton of tribal intermarriage and cooperation. But the colonial administrators openly favored the Tutsis over the Hutu (because the Tutsis were a minority and thus easier to control and appeal to), and worked to accentuate fabricated Hutu/Tutsi "differences" in order to justify this, effectively creating hatred and resentment where there was hardly any to begin with, in order to serve colonial purposes.

It's also worth pointing out that Rwanda's situation in terms of its population's security and governmental stability has actually improved hugely since the genocide as well. Under Gacaca courts (IE admission and "resolution" courts, focusing on getting thousands of low-level genocidaires to admit and apologize for their crimes in front of the community rather than undertaking criminal proceedings, which would take decades and not really help anything at that level anyways) there has been a great deal of inter-tribal reconciliation, vastly reducing the likelihood of future Hutu.Tutsi conflict, the poverty rate has gone down by 12% in ten years (the majority of Rwanda is now above the poverty line), tourism is rising, the government appears stable, and child mortality has been cut nearly in half in ten years.
Pretty impressive for a tiny, post-genocide state with almost no real resources (beyond a mountain gorilla population).

Somalia,

Weakened and destabilized by the Ogaden War (IE Ethiopia and Somalia being used as puppets for another US/Soviet showdown, given that Somalia was nominally Marxist and Ethipia was nominally Western friendly, although "hilariously", both the US and the USSR had actually switched sides during the war, the West over to Somalia and the USSR to Ethiopia by the time of the conclusion). Essentially, Somalia agreed to become a puppet regime for the US in the area, which resulted in a massively overequipped, anti-democratic (but US-friendly!) and excessively politically prominent military, leading to an effective military dictatorship created and supported by US/Soviet involvement. And when the USSR went down and the US didn't need to care about Somalia anymore, the Somali state that had been built as some crazy hybrid ofa US and Soviet puppet state totally collapsed. Why wouldn't it? Their development as an independent state, rather than a colony or East/West proxy state was effectively hijacked until 1991.

Coupled with irregular famine/drought conditions at the time (resulting in massive famine around 1992-3), and the total collapse of the heavily-armed Somali government into warring militias and remnants of the old proxy regime, and you have the mess that's there now. Would it be such a mess now if the US/USSR (much less the Italians, who colonized originally!) had left well enough alone? I don't think you can really argue it would be.

Central Africa,

The jury's still out, but it looks to be another in the classic line of Muslim/Christian "no-common ground" cases, this time constructed by the French.

Mali

Victim of the same process Nigeria was, only with the French instead of the British being responsible - again shoving a minority Tuareg/Muslim group together with a majority black/Christian population and expecting everybody to play nice with each other. Exacerbated even more by the fact that the Tuaregs (justifiably) feel cheated and pissed off because they got denied statehood in the decolonization process, and don't feel like they share anything with the southern population to justify being in a state with them.

and Sudan

Exact same problem as above, coupled with resource issues as well over the oil. Tons of foreign governmental interference because of oil (even the Chinese getting in on the action) coupled with Soviet interference in the 70s/80s.

are some better-publicized examples.

Get better examples - or at least ones that can't be solidly pinned on clueless Europeans shoving disparate groups together and expecting them to all hold hands and sing Kumbayah with no democratic experience and very little security.
Seriously, this is genuinely important - are you seeing the picture now? Are you getting how why all these conflicts are happening, the groundwork being laid and the game being rigged going back to independence and even further - how the colonizing powers laid the groundwork for all these "petty" or pointless ethnic conflicts and wars, through a systematic policy of shoving disparate and hopelessly unfamiliar ethnic groups together to suit their own needs, leaving those borders intact once they left, and then turning right around and using them as proxies in the Cold War (hopelessly sabotaging the local governments in the process, favoring local strongmen and dictators over democratic development [likely because they were easier to bribe/work with]), or as using them as neocolonial outposts for all sorts of nifty and expensive resources they could promptly ship back to the US or Europe (like diamonds in Liberia and Sierra Leone, or oil in Sudan? Do you see how these aren't just problems that can necessarily be solved in a few decades, but can take years longer - and mostly continue today, because of Western interference and the lingering effects of the border-drawing SNAFU to end all SNAFUs?

I hope you do, but you probably don't!

Don't know about you, but it's pretty hard for me to not be condescending towards the people of a continent where so many countries share the same pattern of corruption, abuse of power, ethnic and religious violence, civil warfare and genocide

Hey, don't be so hard on Europe!

in crass contrast to the more civilized nations of the West.

Oh, sorry. I misunderstood you.

The Western powers might have their hand in it, but they don't go openly telling the natives to cut each other's throats over petty rivalries - they choose to do it themselves.

As opposed to the former Yugoslavs cutting each others' throats a few years back over what I'm sure were totally non-petty and rational rivalries, or all the ethnic wars fought within and between newly independent European states (aftermath of the French Revolution, Franco-Prussian War, etc.)

Tell that to De Beers, AKA The Sierra Leone/Liberian Murderous Militia's Piggy Bank, or the Somalian/Ethiopian governments circa the '70s or all these other colonial countries who had their chance to be functional states irreparably fucked (short of secession) because the Europeans just didn't give a shit about them, and/or would rather they be proxies or neo-colonies instead of functioning states.
They didn't choose to be colonized, and they didn't choose their borders, and they didn't choose their (easily exploitable) resources, and they didn't choose to be in strategically significant spots that the US/USSR decided needed to be fucked around with.
It is not their fault. All of this is rooted in colonization and post-colonial interference, from the West, from the USSR, and from private corporations who had something to gain by exploiting African countries, corrupting their government, and funding militias to do their bidding,

The independence game was stacked against the African continent from the beginning, and if you can't see it, you're either uninformed or your entire view on the matter is unfortunately compromised by some sordid racial inclinations that I won't go into in detail*. there is no other choice. This is the reality of the situation.
*...But you know which ones I mean.

[Arglorand]

/snip/

That was absolutely beautiful.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

It'd be hilarious if the UK just suddenly showed up, bordering the Eastern US and Canada.

Canada and the US quickly flush their weed down the toilet and scramble to clean up the beer bottles; not to mention waking Mexico up and kicking him out of the house.

Mommy's home.

[Zeganas]

Canada and the US quickly flush their weed down the toilet and scramble to clean up the beer bottles; not to mention waking Mexico up and kicking him out of the house.

Mommy's home.

Omg, THIS!

[Yorkopolis]

Yes, a bunch of pictures and a "lurkmore"website, which appears to be a Russian equivalent of Encyclopedia Dramatica, really solidifies your position. "Banderite" seems to be just a slur at this point, since you guys continually paint the entire Ukrainian government as being "Banderites", even though Svoboda constitutes only 8 percent of the Ukrainian parliament. It's about as logical as characterizing the opposition in Ukraine as being Neo-Soviet Stalinists, since the Communist Party of Ukraine has 32 members in Parliament.

The historical Banderites seem to be bog-standard Ukrainian nationalists, who aligned themselves with the Nazis because it was convenient.

The actual Bandera sat in jail under the Nazis. The UPA's ideology was, while not altogether friendly and likeable (they weren't sympathetic to the very concept of democracy, for one) not Nazi but rather opposed to both sides. The OUN (m), who were Melnykites, not Banderites, did collaborate, but the Banderites were, at the time, being shot en masse in Babi Yar.

Besides, I am almost completely certain that Putin finances Right Sector to destabilize Ukraine and keep up the "Nazi Kike-Fasco-Banderite Gay propagandist" charade. The truth of the matter is that Putin doesn't give a single flying fuck about ethnic Russians. If he did, he'd politely negotiate better conditions for them with neighboring countries. Let no one give me that shit about how he tried. His attempts, every single one of them, have been an arrogant Great Power-wannabe rant at Ukraine, or Estonia, or wherever, constantly insulting the country in question with an attitude of "you do what we say, because we're strong, and tough, and no one MESSES WITH MOTHER RUSSIA". Seriously, fuck that attitude. We here in Eastern Europe have had 500 years of that attitude. Enough is enough. But regardless, my point isn't how annoyed we feel at this point. My point is that Putin is a pathetic third world rate dictator ruling a first world nation because said nation has let him pollute their minds with a narrative of "creating a strong Russia". It sure is a pity a strong Russia translates to a "Strong Putin".

This isn't for the first time in history that a powerful nation has forgotten that its power does not give it free reign over everything that happens. The US does that every other day, and the British Empire did it, and the Romans did it thousands of years ago. People ask me why I'm so passionate about this issue. It's because I am sick, sick and tired, of the weak being at the mercy of the strong. It's because my entire nation's history is a desperate struggle not to be at the mercy of the strong. I understand the Ukrainians. I respect the Russians. But I neither understand, nor respect, nor even tolerate the Russian government and its Generalissimo Putin least of all. And no rigged referendum or illegal invasion will change that. On behalf of simple people who want to live in their simple countries -not- being harassed by an occupational army, I just wish he would GTFO out of our affairs.

I know, however, that like any empire, his empire will fall, too. One might say it ended with the first shot fired on Crimea. Or the first tortured Tatar. Or even years ago, in Georgia. With his filthy fingers all over the surrounding countries, Putin sealed his fate forever. Because one day those fingers'll be chopped off. As they were in the Russian Empire, as they were in the Soviet Empire, and as they were in every empire since the dawn of time.

/deeply emotional rant

Because, for any and all reason, this is 100% true down to every letter. +100.

[Anollasia]

Really, no one anwers a construction worker married with a farmer? The most logical answer?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Hope this is sarcastic.

It's Narnia. Eventually you start to hope he's trolling, just because it would be less sad.

[Luziyca]

A Russian author writing about Crimeans wanting to rejoin Russia and achieving it under Putin?

It's the 1800s, how have they predicted the birth of Vladimir Putin?

Besides, it would be more like "A Russian author writing about Moscow throwing a giant hissyfit because one of its obedient little puppets decided to think for itself for once so Russia dredges up some ancient claim,pulls a story about persecution out of its ass, and invades despite widespread international criticism, lying about their involvement, rigging a referendum to make it look like Crimeans want it, and then simply telling Ukraine 'and while we're at it we're going to double the price of a vital resource even though you're having economic trouble' all while relying on the fact that the West is too soft and Ukraine is too weak to respond".

[Ruridova]

It's the 1800s, how have they predicted the birth of Vladimir Putin?

Besides, it would be more like "A Russian author writing about Moscow throwing a giant hissyfit because one of its obedient little puppets decided to think for itself for once so Russia dredges up some ancient claim,pulls a story about persecution out of its ass, and invades despite widespread international criticism, lying about their involvement, rigging a referendum to make it look like Crimeans want it, and then simply telling Ukraine 'and while we're at it we're going to double the price of a vital resource even though you're having economic trouble' all while relying on the fact that the West is too soft and Ukraine is too weak to respond".

Oh good. Just what my ego needed.

[Reploid Productions]

<snip>

Image

Holy balls, that was one of the most amazing tear-downs I've seen in my entire time on NS.

[Wisconsin9]

Basic historical context?
Funnily enough, this is the exact line of thought that justified the original colonization and exploitation of Africa.
"Why shouldn't we be condescending and imperialistic towards Africa? They're just a bunch of stupid, heathen tribals! They need Jesus and to be relieved of all their burdensome land and resources!" has now become "Why shouldn't we be condescending and imperialistic towards Africa? They're just a bunch of stupid, fractious morons who can't govern themselves because of how much we fucked them all up for centuries by screwing around with their ethnic distributions and the borders of their states! They need foreign (coughWHITEcough) militaries to tell them what to do, because they're clearly too intrinsically stupid to know for themselves!"

Almost like it was in the West's interest to keep Africa poor during colonization, and felt no responsibility to help them afterwards!
But hey, we all know how pretty much all Americans were rich and prosperous by 1850-1860 or so, so that's a totally valid comparison for you to make!

That's partly just a function of the climate, you know.

Yeah, it's not like the chaos and shitty planning of the decolonization phase (or the initial colonization phase, for that matter) had anything to do with anything. Or the continuous Western/Soviet support of various warlords and rebel movements during the Cold War mattered anywhere. Or the massive numbers of corporate oil/diamond/gold/agriculture companies trying to take advantage of fragile new democratic states to turn them into neocolonial colonies (generally ruled by a pliable local fellow they could install as dictator), in the process funding or even creating militias and rebel groups wholesale to support them on the ground (frequently trained and augmented augmented by British/French/Dutch/Belgian/Saffie mercs) ever did anything.
Nope. None of that mattered.
But hey, America was in great shape 50-60 years after WE were decolonized, right? We didn't have rebelling provinces, or ridiculously common rights abuses, or a civil war on our doorsteps or anything! We did everything bloodlessly and perfectly, always!

Some have had 50, most have had less. Some have effectively had far, far less.

Because hundreds of years of systematic and horrific abuse (in numerous cases) can easily be cancelled out in a few decades or so, especially when the very states you're decrying were practically constructed to be dysfunctional. And if they're not cancelled out, well, sorry, black people, but you had your fucking chance and you blew it! Back to the rubber plantation, unless you want to be light a hand!

Just like whites in now developed countries, who are and have always been so good at setting aside differences bloodlessly.
Like the Germans did with the Jews, or the US did with the Native Americans, or how Britain dealt with Indian rebellions, or how the French dealt with the Vietnamese, or how the Belgians treated the Congo, or how the Dutch treated the Indonesians...

Right, that's really easy when your country is split roughly into into (at least!) two groups who don't know anything about each other, don't speak the same language, don't worship the same gods, don't look alike (preventing easy population mixing), neither having any sort of democratic experience whatsoever...and oh, by the way, one group was openly and arbitrarily favored by the local colonizers and got special privileges (a la certain tribes in the Congo), so everybody is a bit pissed off at them, to say the least.
Yeah! There's tons of common ground to build on there! That's a reasonable expectation! Just like how the Yugoslavs set aside their differences!

Yes, every African country is an unrepentant shithole! Shitholes, the lot of them!
SILENCE, FOR A EUROPEAN WHITE HAS SPOKEN!
COWER IN JUDGEMENT, YOU ETHNICS!

Judging from context, I'm interpreting "petty tribal rivalries" here as "actual conflicts with actual rationales and causes behind them that I can't be bothered to actually understand or look into in any way".

What seems pointless to you obviously doesn't seem pointless to them. Your own ignorance as to African conflicts doesn't necessarily translate to everyone else being as ignorant as you are.
If they were pointless, they wouldn't be fighting, obviously. As you're evidently a comfy non-African with obviously no specific information on anything you're talking about (but you do have the odd belief you have the right, if not the obligation, to pass judgement on the entire continent by virtue of...your whiteness? Probably), it may behoove you to actually learn why those conflicts and civil wars are happening, instead of dismissing it all as "blacks are stoopid and love to fight each other because they just do".
And don't stat whining about how that's not your argument, because we both know that'd be a lie.

Not easy when their countries are arbitrarily created relics that don't reflect actual tribal or national divides in any way, shoving massive numbers of divided and unfamiliar ethnic groups together into one state (with borders that were almost uniformly suited to Europeans sensibilities, instead of any sort of national national divide - you'll note very few successful Euro nations ever had to deal with that) with no framework for how they'd ever get along in a coherent state, with literally .

The victim of the exact colonial amalgamation and consolidation I've mentioned above, coupled with an absolutely horrific phase of colonial administration that in no way was concerned for the welfare of the natives beyond using them as effective slave labor. Belgium has not supported or aided the DRC in any way pre or post colonialism, and the entire country has essentially been left to fend for itself. The country is composed of a ridiculous number of nations and tribes with no ties to each other, no infrastructure, and no reason to even be a single state. That's on Belgium for shitty planning, not the Africans for having to live with it.

Whose conflict can be traced in massive part to De Beers' exploitation of the country, DIMINCO's funding of pro-De Beers rebel movements and antigovernment militias, and overt participation in co-opting the S-L government under Siaka Stevens and beyond in order to effectively turn the whole country into a neo-diamond-mining colony.

Again, a conflict due massively to the intervention of foreign diamond mining companies and the blood diamond trade (I also hypothesize/suspect some undue involvement in local governmental policies [IE the corruption scene]from the Western shipping industry as well, given that Liberia is perhaps the world's most famous shipping registration tax haven, but that's more difficult to prove. It does, however, make a kind of logical sense).
And who buys blood diamonds, making the entire industry profitable for conglomerates like De Beers?
I'll give you a hint - it isn't the local populace. They just get to be the slave workforce for the anti/pro-government militias, mining these diamonds for...De Beers!

Victim of the British shoving a massively Muslim/North African population in the North together with a massively Christian/black population in the South and expecting them to play nice. You'll note all those European countries you tout as examples of successful modernization never really had to deal with a foreign power imposing that, and the Euro countries that did, like Yugoslavia and Belgium...haven't worked out so well (Belgium essentially being a failed state when it comes to Flemish/Walloon cooperation).
Oh, and also, Shell is in Nigeria big time, and has also been ridiculously obvious in how much money they throw around there - hell, they even have local militias to go around beating up and killing people who don't like them (check the legal records for Kiobel vs. Royal Dutch Shell on that one)!
But I'm sure they're not one of the reasons the government is so corrupt and dysfunctional. No, sir.

The exact same thing as the Congo (which makes sense, given that it was administered as part of the Congo area under Belgium). The Belgians, funnily enough, actually pretty much created the Hutu/Tutsi divide - before colonization (and even during), there was a ton of tribal intermarriage and cooperation. But the colonial administrators openly favored the Tutsis over the Hutu (because the Tutsis were a minority and thus easier to control and appeal to), and worked to accentuate fabricated Hutu/Tutsi "differences" in order to justify this, effectively creating hatred and resentment where there was hardly any to begin with, in order to serve colonial purposes.

It's also worth pointing out that Rwanda's situation in terms of its population's security and governmental stability has actually improved hugely since the genocide as well. Under Gacaca courts (IE admission and "resolution" courts, focusing on getting thousands of low-level genocidaires to admit and apologize for their crimes in front of the community rather than undertaking criminal proceedings, which would take decades and not really help anything at that level anyways) there has been a great deal of inter-tribal reconciliation, vastly reducing the likelihood of future Hutu.Tutsi conflict, the poverty rate has gone down by 12% in ten years (the majority of Rwanda is now above the poverty line), tourism is rising, the government appears stable, and child mortality has been cut nearly in half in ten years.
Pretty impressive for a tiny, post-genocide state with almost no real resources (beyond a mountain gorilla population).

Weakened and destabilized by the Ogaden War (IE Ethiopia and Somalia being used as puppets for another US/Soviet showdown, given that Somalia was nominally Marxist and Ethipia was nominally Western friendly, although "hilariously", both the US and the USSR had actually switched sides during the war, the West over to Somalia and the USSR to Ethiopia by the time of the conclusion). Essentially, Somalia agreed to become a puppet regime for the US in the area, which resulted in a massively overequipped, anti-democratic (but US-friendly!) and excessively politically prominent military, leading to an effective military dictatorship created and supported by US/Soviet involvement. And when the USSR went down and the US didn't need to care about Somalia anymore, the Somali state that had been built as some crazy hybrid ofa US and Soviet puppet state totally collapsed. Why wouldn't it? Their development as an independent state, rather than a colony or East/West proxy state was effectively hijacked until 1991.

Coupled with irregular famine/drought conditions at the time (resulting in massive famine around 1992-3), and the total collapse of the heavily-armed Somali government into warring militias and remnants of the old proxy regime, and you have the mess that's there now. Would it be such a mess now if the US/USSR (much less the Italians, who colonized originally!) had left well enough alone? I don't think you can really argue it would be.

The jury's still out, but it looks to be another in the classic line of Muslim/Christian "no-common ground" cases, this time constructed by the French.

Victim of the same process Nigeria was, only with the French instead of the British being responsible - again shoving a minority Tuareg/Muslim group together with a majority black/Christian population and expecting everybody to play nice with each other. Exacerbated even more by the fact that the Tuaregs (justifiably) feel cheated and pissed off because they got denied statehood in the decolonization process, and don't feel like they share anything with the southern population to justify being in a state with them.

Exact same problem as above, coupled with resource issues as well over the oil. Tons of foreign governmental interference because of oil (even the Chinese getting in on the action) coupled with Soviet interference in the 70s/80s.

Get better examples - or at least ones that can't be solidly pinned on clueless Europeans shoving disparate groups together and expecting them to all hold hands and sing Kumbayah with no democratic experience and very little security.
Seriously, this is genuinely important - are you seeing the picture now? Are you getting how why all these conflicts are happening, the groundwork being laid and the game being rigged going back to independence and even further - how the colonizing powers laid the groundwork for all these "petty" or pointless ethnic conflicts and wars, through a systematic policy of shoving disparate and hopelessly unfamiliar ethnic groups together to suit their own needs, leaving those borders intact once they left, and then turning right around and using them as proxies in the Cold War (hopelessly sabotaging the local governments in the process, favoring local strongmen and dictators over democratic development [likely because they were easier to bribe/work with]), or as using them as neocolonial outposts for all sorts of nifty and expensive resources they could promptly ship back to the US or Europe (like diamonds in Liberia and Sierra Leone, or oil in Sudan? Do you see how these aren't just problems that can necessarily be solved in a few decades, but can take years longer - and mostly continue today, because of Western interference and the lingering effects of the border-drawing SNAFU to end all SNAFUs?

I hope you do, but you probably don't!


Hey, don't be so hard on Europe!


Oh, sorry. I misunderstood you.


As opposed to the former Yugoslavs cutting each others' throats a few years back over what I'm sure were totally non-petty and rational rivalries, or all the ethnic wars fought within and between newly independent European states (aftermath of the French Revolution, Franco-Prussian War, etc.)

Tell that to De Beers, AKA The Sierra Leone/Liberian Murderous Militia's Piggy Bank, or the Somalian/Ethiopian governments circa the '70s or all these other colonial countries who had their chance to be functional states irreparably fucked (short of secession) because the Europeans just didn't give a shit about them, and/or would rather they be proxies or neo-colonies instead of functioning states.
They didn't choose to be colonized, and they didn't choose their borders, and they didn't choose their (easily exploitable) resources, and they didn't choose to be in strategically significant spots that the US/USSR decided needed to be fucked around with.
It is not their fault. All of this is rooted in colonization and post-colonial interference, from the West, from the USSR, and from private corporations who had something to gain by exploiting African countries, corrupting their government, and funding militias to do their bidding,

The independence game was stacked against the African continent from the beginning, and if you can't see it, you're either uninformed or your entire view on the matter is unfortunately compromised by some sordid racial inclinations that I won't go into in detail*. there is no other choice. This is the reality of the situation.
*...But you know which ones I mean.

That is the most beautiful thing I've ever seen.

[Libertarian California]

I hate you guys so damn much.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

This is the issue with the fantasy peddlers. They want to play at being heroes without all of the work and scrutiny that actual heroes go through. Learning the law. Learning when to apply lethal force. Background checks. Psychological assessments. Continuous training to ensure preparing for scenarios involving deadly force and a threat to life. And above all else an enormous amount of continuous scrutiny. All that is too much trouble for the wannabe heroes.

And that's what I mean by cavalier. You want to be doctors because someone taught you how to cut meat. You want to be astronauts because you're a really good driver. You want to be soldiers because you have nice boots.

If you want the right to pursue, apprehend and execute criminals while putting other people at risk, then you're going to have to put in some work. You're going to have to prove you've been taught to minimize that risk and that you're actually capable of it. You're going to have to prove you have a reasonable understanding of the reality of these types of situations. Unfortunately I see very little evidence of this. For most of the internet tough guys, they don't even appear to be willing to just fake like they've put in the work for the purpose of the internet argument. For the most part, they act like it's affront to reason that anyone would expect them have that level of training.

And absolutely beautiful answer that comes about oh so often is that a lot of cops aren't trained well enough to handle the situation. Because nothing says people should be allowed to act with less training than complaining that other people need more of it.

I'm sorry that the odds are against you ever getting to fulfill your hero fantasy. I'm sorry that if you are ever put in a situation that looks like a hero opportunity you're far more likely to be Zimmerman or Dunn than John McClane. The real world isn't inclined to fulfill fantasies. That's why those movies are so fun to watch. Give a little more credit to the actual heroes who put in work day in and day out to make our world and our communities a little bit safer and a little bit better. And keep the violent fantasies contained in your XBOX where they don't put me at risk.

[Risottia]

Sun Wukong achieves epic win on post 2.

What are your personality test results?
http://personality-testing.info/tests/JUNG.php

I got NSFW.

[The Republic of Lanos]

If you want to make the Feeders more interesting, remove the current influence levels and return us to some semblance of pre-Influence rules

Speaking for the mods/admin in my official capacity as forum admin and longest serving of the game mods:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO NO NO NO NOOOOOO NOPE NEVER NOOOOOOO
OH DEAR LORD MAX IN AUSTRALIA
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Oh gods, the nightmares, the horror! THE HORROR!! You weren't there, man, you DON'T KNOW! The multies, the cheaters! Natives homeless, regions destroyed! I was there man, I saw it. Neck-deep in the blood of dead griefers! My finger on the trigger, sleep deprived and twitchy after chasing the update to catch them, trying to decide with entire nations at stake... did that raider kick more than 10% of the natives? DID HE?! DID HE SHARE THAT PASSWORD WITH THE NATIVES LIKE HE WAS SUPPOSED TO?! Stuff like that, the stuff of instant DEAT, one minute you're there, the next BOOM, gone! A smoldering crater where your nation used to be!

*ahem* What I mean to say is that moderation will not go back to anything like the pre-Influence rules.


~Evil Forum Empress Rep Prod the Ninja Mod
~She who wields the Banhammer; master of the mighty moderation no-dachi Kiritateru Teikoku

[Bezombia]

Is it lonely up there?

You mean high up on bullshit mountain?

made me lol

[Divair2]

You mean high up on bullshit mountain?

made me lol

diviar teechs u 2 play NS:
1. take rafarance
2. putin (HAHA C PUN?) thred
3. ackquire quootes

[Krazakistan]

I'm working on a full Pro/Anti list and I found This ideology.

Do y'all think I might be a Sadist?

BDSM? If that's your thing, I ain't gonna judge you.

Bit odd for a purportedly 14 year old Mormon.

Found this to be incredibly hilarious. Hopefully some of you will get a laugh out of this.