Kavekk wrote:
So you're not actually 'first in women' WHATEVER THE @#%^ THAT MEANS AHHHHH AHHHHHHHH AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH after all, then, chap? or, at least, you admit that more Miss Universe medals doesn't prove that you are, objectively speaking?
ALTERNATE RESPONSE:
Dude, I admitted that I was just joking about U.S. being number one. That comment was borderline trolling. The U.S. is cocky and it pisses people off. That's the only reason why I mentioned it. Now I'm just having fun arguing that, partially trolling. I've actually said it a couple of times in the past few weeks. I'm surprised it wasn't until now someone said something.
What winning Miss Universe proves is that we are better at winning Miss Universe than other countries. Nothing more and nothing less.
Kavekk wrote:
Is it? Is it really? Really, is it? Really, is it really?
Yes, because that means that other countries tried and failed, which makes them a failure. If you have a fundamental thought against the pageant, where winning would be bad, then you wouldn't participate.
RDD wrote:
Glad to see you skipped over basic education, national debt, life expectancy. All things which define a strong country and all things that the US is not so good with. Last I checked they were ranked 6th overall for education (math/science/language) and 4th or 5th in life expectancy, also currently they hold the most debt (in a monetary language) than any other nation, at 60%(rougly) of their GDP which you so nicely provided us @ 14 trillion dollars, which means the US has more debt than most every other nation on that list does in GDP. (which means I guess they are tops in that department too.)
Don't blame your personal inability to read on me. I'm pretty sure I mentioned at least ONE of those TWICE.
Secondly, I've argued against our k-12 education for quite some time, still don't believe it's where it should be, but have been corrected in the past on how the comparisons are done. The U.S. education is free and open to everyone, actually mandated by law. That's not the case in other countries that perform much better (on average) than us. Not only do they have to pay for school, it's competitive to get in some schools, so only the best of the best get in. So, it's like comparing nation X's best students vs all of the U.S. students to include the handicap.
It's not a coincidence that when you place those same conditions (competitive, tuition, etc) on the U.S schools(universities, private schools), we excel. Putting all of that in context, I don't think being ranked 4-6 is that bad. If so, what about the rest of the world? If the top countries aren't close, the rest of the world completely sucks.
RDD wrote:
Best At Debt, Best at War. Lacking in everything else guess that means you are the best....
Since when is "Best at War" a bad thing? How exactly are we "lacking in everything else"? No country is perfect and I was never arguing that the U.S. is perfect. Crap, I was just arguing how it doesn't have an identity.
Paulsol wrote:
I dont think its a prerequisite to be smart to get into the military.
Part of me wants to say that its probably a handicap in most cases. But that would be mean....
Funny how you say that yet is required to posses a bachelors to be commissioned and a masters to be competitive to get beyond an O5. Wait, not interesting at all.. you're just ignorant.
Aili wrote:
Don't worry, most of the people in the military are not authorized to think...
Yea, there's no thinking involved in leading hundreds of people.... just hit the green button.. You also, are an idiot.