true. .. football players get paid so much because fans pay money to go see the games. Hence, the money is there to be provided to the players. If citizens paid money to twerkingmidgets
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (351)
[ 351 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#2 - lieutenantshitface **User deleted account**
+216 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#108 to #2 - spetsnazvymple
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
that's okay lieutenant ********, not everybody's cut out for the marines.
#307 to #108 - anon id: 24a09b1e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
You have misunderstood the marines. The people who become marines are the ones who are not cut out to go to college.
#145 to #108 - anon id: 9fb2b897
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Back down everyone, Spetsnazymple is on the loose
User avatar #67 to #2 - oxYKellark
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I dont think you understand the concept of defending then.
User avatar #103 to #2 - supermegasherman
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
the best defense is a good offense
#126 to #2 - anon id: eafcf0fe
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Once you attack there's three ends it can end, in early phase you can make peace, then either you win the war or surrender in the end, so basically if a country is invading it will have to defend from the country it is invading.
#147 to #126 - lieutenantshitface **User deleted account**
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#296 to #2 - kotos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
It's called 'LIBERATING!'
#305 to #296 - anon id: 24a09b1e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Indeed and resistance is called terrorism.
User avatar #104 to #2 - finni
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
It might be. A country is allowed to invade another country if that other country poses a threat to your country's security and independence.

So if for example I am Poland, and Germany has been really threatening to me and I have legit proof that he is up to something, or he has violent groups attacking me, but doesn't do anything to stop them I have a right to invade him to get rid of the threat, but once the threat is over, I have to leave him and go back home.
User avatar #117 to #104 - therichie
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
and if he's got lots of oil, maybe take it with you
User avatar #295 to #117 - tealcanaan
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Ya, because we got so much of the oil and mineral rights in Iraq and Afghanistan......

(Actually Europe and China.....)
#308 to #295 - anon id: 24a09b1e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I see your sarcasm and ignore it. Indeed you did.
User avatar #119 to #117 - finni
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
That's not the point
User avatar #120 to #119 - therichie
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
it's america's point
User avatar #122 to #120 - finni
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Maybe, but my point is that you can invade another country and still be defending your country
User avatar #124 to #122 - therichie
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
i disagree with your opinion, but i respect your right to have one

good day
User avatar #127 to #124 - finni
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Although I appreciate you being tolerant of people having a different opinion, I didn't state one.

My point is that a country, any country, can invade another country in a war of self-defence. That's not an opinion, that's a fact. A law. You may disagree with that law, but it's still a law. I never said I supported the law or spoke against it. I just said that a country is allowed to justify invading another country in a war of self-defence.
User avatar #131 to #127 - therichie
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
i apologize. My opinion is that war of ANY kind is wrong, preemptive or not, and you seemed to hold the opposite opinion
User avatar #139 to #131 - finni
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Ah, so you're a pacifist. I see.
#181 to #127 - anon id: 47205f58
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Tell me this.. In poland's case, what you say might be true.. but for USA. How can they feel threatened by any other country in the world? They spend around 6,61 times more on their army than any other country in the world.. no one would ever attack USA because of that, so in what freaking way can they feel threatened enough to just.. bomb the shiet out of another country like Iraq and those?.. That is NOT selfdefense no matter how you look at it.. Its like if a 5 year old came at me with a stick and said that he would hit me and i just took out a glock and shot him... its NOT selfdefense
User avatar #188 to #181 - finni
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I haven't decided what to think of the US foreign policy but if we're speaking about defence, the US does have a right to invade to defend itself. It doesn't matter if the US has the greatest army in the world or not. It's about how much damage the other country WANTS or says it will take. If another country has terrorists or a leader who poses instability to the US security, the US may take down that threat, even if the country doesn't manage to do any special damage.

Take North Korea as an example. They pose a threat with the nuclear bomb, but they wouldn't get far enough to reach America, or give any big damage. They'd kill a couple of thousands, but that doesn't matter. All that matters is that they pose a threat to security and American lives. They may then invade in a war of self defence.

I don't know, but the Iraq war was justified by them having a nuclear bomb, so then they had a right to invade but of course they never had a bomb, so wasn't a legit claim to invade them.

So in short: As long as a country poses a threat, be it large or little, to national security, the country's independence and/or people's lives, the country may invade in a war to get rid of the threat.
User avatar #202 to #188 - komandantmirkoo
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
US can do anything they want. if my country ( or any other poorfag country) tried to invade someone because we feel threatened, we would get carpet bombed by NATO.
User avatar #218 to #202 - finni
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
It's not just that you feel threatened, you have to show why you feel threatened. If your claim is legit then you have a right to invade.

If you win is a totally different thing.
#304 to #188 - anon id: 24a09b1e
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
They never did have a nuclear bomb though. The US stated that they did. The invaded, found out that the information was false and then they stayed anyway.
#279 to #188 - anon id: b213b5e6
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
They had WMDs, only, not nuclear you know? Nerve gas is a WMA in my opinion (Weapon of Mass Anhiliation) and thus a real threat when used against civilian lives, specially because of its potency as an ender for human lives.
User avatar #297 to #188 - tealcanaan
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
They had had WMD's in the form of chemical weapons that they had used before on the Curds and Iranians. We invaded them because they had already caused two wars with us, so we decided to take out Saddam permanently, but our stay was made longer by foreign insurgents coming into the country to destabilize it.
#172 to #104 - lieutenantshitface **User deleted account**
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #5 - settlwlvs
Reply +151 123456789123345869
(06/24/2013) [-]
football players get paid so much because fans pay money to go see the games. Hence, the money is there to be provided to the players. If citizens paid money to go watch wars, maybe soldiers could get paid more?
User avatar #27 to #5 - saturated
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
like the gov't would give any of that extra money to soldiers though
#191 to #5 - anon id: ddb88a95
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
finally someone who ******* agrees with me, sport is like a business, these ******* clowns talking about soldiers getting paid more are ******* idiots
#149 to #5 - diablojoe
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I believe that some time during the 18th or 19th century, rich aristocrats actually would pay to be taken to watch battles. I think there were quite a lot of spectators present for the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War.
User avatar #115 to #5 - hasinvadedyou
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
The draft would make for interesting television..
#189 to #5 - tholomewsense
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
User avatar #226 to #189 - lightninghedgehog
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
because it costs $600 to fire a minigun for 1 minute, but a football costs about $20, and can be reused.
#35 to #5 - sreggin
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
i would pay lots of monies to watch war
#3 - larknok
Reply +90 123456789123345869
(06/24/2013) [-]
de·fense
/diˈfens/
Noun
The act of invading a far less civilized country for reasons you either don't understand or don't agree with.
User avatar #300 to #3 - tealcanaan
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
>Harboring known terrorists who had recently attacked the U.S.
>Removing a dictator who had already caused two wars with the U.S. by destabilizing the area, as well as having used chemical weapons on the Curds and Iranian.

I must not understand the reasons......
#7 to #3 - anon id: 7d4e874c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/24/2013) [-]
One of them is payed by tax money.
User avatar #140 to #7 - cloymax
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
don't be so defensive
User avatar #141 to #140 - defensive
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
**** OFF!
#142 to #141 - cloymax
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I couldn't resist.
I couldn't resist.
#144 to #142 - defensive
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Well resist next time.
#146 to #144 - cloymax
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I'll try.
I'll try.
#109 to #3 - anon id: 7a9f12fd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
You must have an American dictionary...
#22 to #3 - qwertfag
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
wouldn't that be a verb.
#26 - herpaderpasaur
Reply +54 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I"m so ******* tired of this argument, I hate so many of the people in my country I swear, half of them shouldn't be allowed to breath, much less vote
I"m so ******* tired of this argument, I hate so many of the people in my country I swear, half of them shouldn't be allowed to breath, much less vote
User avatar #107 to #26 - imagnetsucks
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Including you?
User avatar #136 to #26 - hankmccoy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Assuming you'd choose a side, what side would you be on?
User avatar #333 to #136 - herpaderpasaur
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I don't really know that this argument has sides, it's unrealistic to try to pay all of our troops the money we give athletes. Their pay isn't determined by what they do it's how much money there is in it and sports generate tons of revenue while soldiers have to be payed with tax money which goes into a lot of other stuff. Do I think it's fair? of course not but it's how the world works and it's never going to change
User avatar #13 - demandsgayversion
Reply +33 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
More money comes in in the football industry. Merchandise, commercial space for the super bowl, tickets, food, normal TV, other stuff.

Unless you can convince civilians to buy the corpses of middle eastern people, there's no money coming in from war.
User avatar #62 to #13 - willdabeast
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Or maybe the government shouldn't fund libraries or they shouldn't fund people who live off of foodstamps. That's just a small thought though. The soldiers could get a lot more money if we kept people away from abusing the system. I'm talking about the lazy (insert every race here) who won't work and not the people who lost their job or can't get one due to a disability. Just a thought.
User avatar #69 to #13 - oxYKellark
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
"No money comes in from war"

Do you even know anything about WWII?
holy **** dude, War makes A LOT of money.
Now a days no one of the civillian side is forced to give up anything and the government just contracts **** out instead of starting programs for production so only an elite few get money out of it in todays world, but they sure do get a lot.
User avatar #90 to #13 - stijnverheye
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
well i would like to buy some guns/corpses directly from the war (for supporting the soldiers !)
User avatar #243 to #13 - udungoofedup
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
The spoils of War my friend, the spoils of War.
User avatar #101 to #13 - birthdaybrony
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Obviously the money would come from advertising. What we need is decal covered uniforms.
User avatar #123 to #13 - kirkbot
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I'd totally buy one
#152 to #13 - Nutshell
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
"there's no money coming in from war. "
"there's no money coming in from war. "
#195 - DerpScout
Reply +26 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
So we should turn warfare into a sport and market it to the masses?
User avatar #185 - pipedt
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Not to be a hater but, when was the last time soldiers in America defended against a real threat?
#211 to #185 - pxthreezerothree
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
You realize that overwhelming majority of al aqaeda has pretty much been decimated in thanks to no small part by the US military's actions in Afghanistan. Including my own, after two tours there I like to think I made the tiniest of differences.
User avatar #301 to #211 - pipedt
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Thanks for cleaning up your own mess I guess?
#337 to #301 - pxthreezerothree
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I don't know if it was my mess or even the US's mess. There was and is a mess there though. The main problem in Afghanistan are the foreign fighters not the Afghans. But the US can't even secure its own borders, so that's that.
#228 to #211 - anon id: dbf07f88
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
you didn't
#233 to #228 - pxthreezerothree
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Considering who the american people elect to lead this country, I wouldn't be surprised if that were true.
#338 to #185 - larknok
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
World War II.
#193 to #185 - furtehlulz
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
inb4 'no more towers have been jenga'd since 9/11'
User avatar #198 to #185 - IAmManbearpig
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
well no more towers have been jenga'd since 9/11
America: 1776
everywhere else: 0
suck my freedom, fukn faggit
User avatar #231 to #198 - senseofpurpose
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
actually, America -2
everywhere else: 0
#177 - zenberg
Reply +14 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
This guy is wearing a hat, not a helmet. Your argument is invalid
#32 - LovegoodJuggalo
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Why would you do this OP. Did you not foresee the endless debates and arguments this would start!
Why would you do this OP. Did you not foresee the endless debates and arguments this would start!
User avatar #154 - ruebezahl
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Yea, but the man who joined the football team did so because he had a skill: playing football.

The man who joined the army did so because he didn't have any skills whatsoever.
User avatar #179 to #154 - zenberg
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Actually I'd be willing to defend this opinion. I see it allot. In fact I have a friend who just enlisted in the navy because he literally has nothing he wants to achieve. Not just him too, his older brother did the exact same thing. I see it time and time again, really sad to see a lot of my classmates just sign up because they have nothing better to do and playing COD made them interested. Their are of course exceptions to this, but it's not a far fetch.
#186 to #154 - anon id: 15b62be2
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
yea, im anon. at work. i hate to see military ignorant people argue about things like this. "Officers put together the master plan" yea, that's exactly what happens. And there is no difference in targetting, a target is a target. HVTs do not encounter massive attacks versus "ordinary" troops, it is actually the opposite given how they travel. HVTs fly or use small, fast moving vehicles like armored SUVs whereas your "ordinary" troops use slower moving vehicles in usually long convoys. So who does the enemy need more firepower to takeout? Join your respective fighting force and go into combat then come run your mouth. As far as skills, most people who join the military are some crafty sons of bitches. I for one was a double major, physics and mech. engineering, in college who spent most of my life fixing up cars and went into intelligence in the military. Yes, no skills here. No general knowledge of anything. Just blind idiots running around.
User avatar #155 to #154 - MurphyUK
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Even though the Army teaches you a lot of skills. You also know nothing about the guy joining the Army he/she could have a lot of skills.
User avatar #156 to #155 - konradkurze
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
especially since USA is on a theme of not hiring skilled people because they have to pay them more, most bosses prefer unskilled idiots they can pay minimum wage
User avatar #158 to #156 - MurphyUK
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
I know plenty of people in the Army and they are all good a something. Granted there a few idiots but why should a idiot be paid less if he is willing to work hard?
User avatar #161 to #158 - konradkurze
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
well its simple, people should be paid based on ability
if someone has no skills then they should get minimum wage and work their way up as they learn
sad thing is, alot of US employers prefer to keep staffs of low to unskilled workers to keep expenses down and profits up
i know a woman who's a highly skilled nurse, who has enough skill to qualify as a doctor, and she cant find work in hospitals because they dont want to pay her what shes worth and instead hire basic nurses they can pay the minimum nurse pay rate
User avatar #162 to #161 - MurphyUK
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
They should also be paid on what they are willing to do.
User avatar #163 to #162 - konradkurze
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
well yes, work pay would be based on duties involved and risks they may encounter

kinda like how official soldiers make crap money for serving in general warfare, but some hired guns ive heard of get paid $50 an hour because the people theyre hired to protect are more targeted than normal
User avatar #166 to #163 - MurphyUK
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
In war you are basically always targeted by the enemy.
User avatar #167 to #166 - konradkurze
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
yeah but your average soldier just comes under normal fire when enemies see them
specific targets get more priority, thus are more under threat

shoot a soldier, the other side loses just another gun
shoot an officer or a politician, the other wise loses leadership and influence
User avatar #168 to #167 - MurphyUK
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Kill the basic soldier you break a bit off their defensive, the soldiers make that wall stopping them from just walking in.
User avatar #169 to #168 - konradkurze
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
yeah but soldiers on the defensive need the officers in HQ telling them where enemies are coming from to plan defences, and depends on the soldiers, some fight harder when desperate
User avatar #171 to #169 - MurphyUK
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
Officers do not tell you were the enemy is coming from, there is a job for that in the Army to do with Radars and such alike, it is apart of logistics. I don't get what you mean by the last bit.
User avatar #175 to #171 - konradkurze
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
different HQ troops do the different tasks like radar, checking enemy movements, etc, but its the officers who put it all together for the grand strategy
#160 to #155 - anon id: 44a8a8e7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
That's a lot like saying "You don't know anything about the person who jumped off the cliff. He may not have been suicidal."

There are good reasons why the army recruits in areas where they can expect to find a lot of people who don't really have any perspective.
User avatar #170 to #160 - MurphyUK
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(06/25/2013) [-]
No it is nothing like saying that. I have got no idea how you thought those two were comparable.