I don't want to see your home videos again, no.

I know, New Luna.

But the point is, London isn't becoming any more major of a city. Singapore/Hong Kong/ Seoul/Tokyo are.

And secret agents are good... but nukes and manpower win wars.

http://youtu.be/f215_AM5d8s

really, Salty?

I don't have time to bother with ridiculous conspiracy theories. Especially **** like that...

It isn't a conspiracy theory it just wasn't related to Alltime 10s.....as it wasn't 10 facts.

@The Conservative
The roads thing was a joke btw

Sorry. I didn't bother to watch the video before- just read the description about the UK controlling the US.

And after watching the video, it seems like they are exaggerating.

Well Ox the world of course would be better without nukes but the second one country disarms it immediately puts it In danger. In fact, that's how I think the U.S. will eventually fall. The Hippie California bastards will eventually convince the people to disarm our nuclear weapons without getting the same courtesy from the other nuclear powers. Then, with no war nuclear deterrent, U.S. will suffer from a Major loss of power, her foreign policy will be forced to become less defense, and in the end we will be nuked

And gentleman let me remind you, there is a massive difference between being able to make a bomb and actually having a bomb. Germany, Netherlands, Turkey, and Poland are all nations who have bombs ( usually because the U.S. gave them ) however none of them can make them. America, Britain, Russia, India, Pakistan, North Korea, France, are all nations who have created their own nuclear weapons

^ Israel.

Japan has the capability.

South Africa has made nukes.

Bombs are super easy to make. Strong regulations for nuclear waste disposal exist for this reason.

If you don't like Nuclear, you could use Mines. It is very easy to deploy mines from an aircraft and it should be a crime.

Mines kill people 40 years after a war has ended. [Vietnam]

Yes, but mines dont give you cancer and last thousands of years...

and lets just be serious, it would take a while to wipe out 99.9% of all people with mines.

Edited 12/28/2015 22:12:30

"Today, there are an estimated 110 million anti-personnel mines in the ground and another 250 million stockpiled in at least 108 countries around the world. Between 5 and 10 million more mines are produced each year, benefiting the producers to the tune of $50 to $180 million annually."


http://www.care.org/emergencies/facts-about-landmines


"These are the most commonly found antipersonnel land mines, designed to rip off the lower half of the leg and project shoe, dirt and bone higher up into the leg, causing secondary infection and higher amputation. They are sold for as little as $3 each. One type of explosive blast effect AP mine is the "butterfly" mine, commonly found in Afghanistan. These have a combination of odd shape and bright color that seems irresistible to children."


If the USA invests its whole budget in buying 3 $ mines, it could make enough mines to kill the whole world indirectly.

------
http://qntm.org/destroy

Top methods to destroy the Earth ! :P
------

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Landmines_html/Real_Weapons_Destruc.html

Landmines : The real Weapon of Mass Destruction !

Edited 12/28/2015 22:35:53

I'm laughing now.

Imagine a politician with this as his slogan: "If you make me President, I will buy enough mines to destroy the whole planet!

As someone who is further left on the political spectrum, I must say that although I don't agree with their policies, I have immense respect for many libertarian politicians. Ron Paul, for example, was one of the better presidential candidates we've had in a long time. I would never have voted for him based on ideological grounds, but he had a sincerity that I have not seen in any major candidate since 2000 (when I started paying attention to politics). This is especially true this year, where the only candidate who seems remotely sincere and consistent in their beliefs is Bernie Sanders (ignore his ideology for a second, the man believes what he says, his beliefs are consistent, and he has a record of standing by his professed beliefs), and I don't think he's quite on Ron Paul's level.

Couldn't agree with you more. Bernie Sanders (although I could never support him at an ideological level) is a highly respectable candidate simply due to his ethics, sincerity, honesty, and consistency. Although I feel he lost some of his credibility by running as a Democrat, although I understand why he did it. That being said I see Ron Paul and the libertarian movement as the true "conservatism" that the Republican Party was founded on, particularly between the period after the civil war up until 1932 when we dominated national and regional politics. Although that may be a bit generous if I sound as if the conservatives co-opted Libertarian policies. In truth, American libertarianism traces its routes to Jeffersonian Democracy.

Well not technically. American libertarianism traces it's original routes back to Thomas Pain who was an American writer during the revolution. Thomas Jefferson had a role in basically all major political parties in America but saying he was the direct founder of one or another isn't true. In fact, he identified as Democratic - Republican which has long since died out after his own death.

I do totally agree that Bernie Sanders is probably the most honest and integrity motivated presidential candidate in America. However, when he announced he was running as a democratic it made Me loose a lot of respect for him. Political it was his best option but it went against most everything he had been preaching about for years.

Conservative is not an ideology.


It is just keeping things the old way.



Types of Conservatism according to http://www.philosophybasics.com/:

Cultural Conservatism

Social Conservatism

Fiscal Conservatism

Paleo-Conservatism

Neo-Conservatism

Bio-Conservatism

http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_conservatism.html

Edited 12/29/2015 00:55:58

Scottish listen, I don't need an arrogant Britt telling me what I should do with my belief system. Heck I could lecture half of Britain on your own history yet I wouldn't because it's disgusting and disrespectful. I put my name as the conservative to annoy people like you because angry warlighters are hilarious.

He's either German or Scottish.....,either way nobody cares what he thinks.