Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 23
Date Signed Up:9/09/2010
Last Login:12/04/2016
Content Thumbs: 282 total,  329 ,  47
Comment Thumbs: 1655 total,  2329 ,  674
Content Level Progress: 20% (2/10)
Level 28 Content: Peasant → Level 29 Content: Peasant
Comment Level Progress: 56% (56/100)
Level 216 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 217 Comments: Comedic Genius
Content Views:11345
Times Content Favorited:15 times
Total Comments Made:631
FJ Points:1952
Favorite Tags: Reading (2) | this (2) | You (2)
Hey im seth nice to meet you. hows it goin

latest user's comments

#94 - $100 dollars more? Im sorry but the consoles are exactly the s…  [+] (1 reply) 09/07/2013 on In A Nutshell +1
User avatar
#99 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
You really didn't notice the rest of my comments did you? I meant the loss of jobs it leads to, and the other restrictions ha ha.
#87 - kids a troll or handy cap dont bother giving him attention.  [+] (7 replies) 09/07/2013 on In A Nutshell 0
User avatar
#90 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
I'm deadly serious actually. I'd rather simply keep my job than share my game with my friend.
User avatar
#89 - syrenthra (09/07/2013) [-]
eh, he isn't being too trolly, I understand his point of view, little extreme but it is valid, we aren't yelling at each other so this helps keep me awake
User avatar
#91 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
Nah I wouldn't yell at you, I see your point too. I think both are valid, but yours scares me. I mean it should right? I work in a game store...if that happened I might lose my job.
User avatar
#92 - syrenthra (09/07/2013) [-]
it is part of society, everyone loses jobs because their jobs get replaced but something better all around for the company
User avatar
#96 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
Nothing good for any game shop when they can't carry something that is roughly 40% of their business...even the big wigs would lose their jobs if that happened. I just hate how this world is turning into something that relies on technology so heavily. I feel like people don't know how to talk to one another. I can't remember the last time I went on a date, or hung out with friends where we didn't at some point check our phones. If stores go digital that is probably one of the only social moments people will have face to face with strangers at a young age. Eventually they will end up like my girl friends cousin who is 5 years old and can't talk...he isn't retarded, but the poor kid was ignored by his parents....stuck in front of a TV the whole time.
User avatar
#98 - syrenthra (09/07/2013) [-]
that is just bad parenting, and we just need a good revolution to spice things up
User avatar
#100 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
I still want some mad man to steal the world's treasures and hide them somewhere. Then challenge the world to find them One Piece style...He'd probably totally make every one his enemy, and then BAM every one attacks his group for like a day...so for one day all the other fighting would stop right? Haha probably just some pipe dream it wouldn't do anything, but man would it be nea
#85 - I dont think you get the concept kid. The original plan was th…  [+] (3 replies) 09/07/2013 on In A Nutshell +1
User avatar
#88 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
I get the concept, but that isn't worth the cost.
User avatar
#94 - GhandisPimpCane (09/07/2013) [-]
$100 dollars more? Im sorry but the consoles are exactly the same besides the kinect, which could pay off in the later part of the console life cycle and probably better than the ps eye. Im taking the risk and hoping the kinect is better this time around. Of course this only my opinion, just like how i prefer xbox and Nintendo games.
User avatar
#99 - maybeimalion (09/07/2013) [-]
You really didn't notice the rest of my comments did you? I meant the loss of jobs it leads to, and the other restrictions ha ha.
#10 - Causes witches are real and indiscriminately kill people.....  [+] (19 replies) 09/04/2013 on say what.... +32
#57 - kmichel (09/04/2013) [-]
They HAVE reasons for killing people. I don't want the US to be attacked of course but our foreign policy certainly isn't winning us any friends. Just look at Syria, which we're going to invade over oil and gas right now.
User avatar
#70 - drewbridge (09/04/2013) [-]
Are.....are you fucking retarded? Like, seriously fucking retarded?
#99 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
For saying what exactly?
User avatar
#126 - newforomador (09/05/2013) [-]
That witches have reasons to kill people. You're confusing witches (more typically called wiccans nowadays, although there is a difference) with people like Devil Worshippers, who kill people in the name of their god(s). It's actually a very strict rule in Wiccanism that you never sacrifice things in the name of whatever you worship.
#138 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
I meant terrorists, not witches. Sorry for the confusion, but I didn't think anyone would think I was referring to the latter.
#69 - ajweston (09/04/2013) [-]
Syria hasn't consisted of more than a third of one percent of the US's oil imports. Plus the attacks carried out by insurgents in Iraq had a tendency for hitting civilians too, especially in the case of suicide bombers.
#100 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
I'm referring to attacks against the US for its foreign policies. If we stop our conquest over oil, that all terrorist attacks against us would stop after a few generations.
#98 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
The problem is that you're looking directly at Syria's oil, which is not the target of the US or the worry of Russia. Covert operations in Syria were planned by the Bush administration as early as 2007 with the goals of 1.) pressuring Assad to be more open to negotiations with Israel and 2.) improving access to oil and gas resources. Gaining access to these resources is more complicated than simply controlling Syria, which is why the removal of Assad from power was only part of a larger plan to topple the governments of seven nations in the region. The goal was to replace these governments in areas with proven oil and gas reserves with leaders more friendly towards our interests due to a stated US need for Persian resources in the foreseeable future. In 2009, Assad refused to sign an agreement that would extend an oil pipeline into Qatar to supply Europe with oil and natural gas. This pipeline would have run through Saudi Arabia, benefiting their economy as well. This of course angered Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and much of Europe, and was done primarily in Russia's interest since Russia is currently Europe's largest supplier of natural gas. The Saudi's pleaded with Russia to dispose of Assad, even offering $15 billion and greater influence in the region. However, Russia refused. Ties between Russia and Syria have been strong for half a century and constitute a stable and profitable relationship that Russia does not want to abandon. Instead, Syria negotiated a $10 billion pipeline deal with Iran that the US was not very happy about. So in the end, the US, Saudi Arabia, and parts of Europe want Assad out, while Russia wants Assad in power. It has nothing to do with chemical weapons, and evidence from leaked documents points to the attacks being staged by the rebels instead, with help from the US. As far as international politics goes, it doesn't really get more clear cut than this.
#139 - ajweston (09/05/2013) [-]
Russia's main interest in Syria is their sole naval base on the Mediterranean which from my understanding they negotiated their asses off to get in the first place and they rightly fear losing it under regime change. And the US will not back chemical weapons use by the rebels either. Oil imports have also decreased in general in recent years as oil production in country has risen significantly and is planned to increase further.
#143 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
Don't forget that Russia forced Assad to get out of a pipeline agreement with Qatar, and sign a new agreement with Iran that would benefit them. They're supplying Europe with about 200 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year and would lose their dominance with Assad out of power. That's interesting about the naval base, but I don't think I'd go as far as calling it the main reason.
#144 - ajweston (09/05/2013) [-]
Citing natural gas as a reason for war makes less sense when I think about the logistics of it. Gas from Qatar needs to be pumped (if the shortest route to Europe is the target) through Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Syria before getting to Turkey. Two of these countries are at war with Israel. One has just been duct taped together politically. And one is in a state of rebellion and is also the main military ally of Iran who has a bigger supply of natural gas than Qatar does in the first place. The point is that it is much more expensive and dangerous for natural gas to be pumped this way than it is to get it from Russia. Russia's natural gas has the added benefit of being easier to access as the majority of the pumps are land based instead of being based offshore as the majority of Qatar's resources are. Add to that the fact that Russia has a larger supply of natural gas to begin with as well as a more powerful infrastructure to pump it, their supply to Europe would be far cheaper than importing from Qatar.
#146 - kmichel (09/06/2013) [-]
Do you think Russia's naval base would be at risk if another government were in place in Syria? I'm not convinced that they would lose it given the power Russia has in comparison to Syria, and doubt that Russia would let themselves get kicked out. However, I'm on the fence about it and could be wrong.
#148 - ajweston (09/06/2013) [-]
They don't know what will happen if someone else takes over, but by setting themselves up as allies of the current regime, they've made themselves adversaries of any group that could take control if the rebellion is successful.
#145 - kmichel (09/06/2013) [-]
Qatar is the world's largest supplier of natural gas, having massive fields up north that they're just itching to sell off. While Russia is supplying Europe with 160-200 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year, Qatar has the ability to supply about 240 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year, with the potential to supply Europe with a lot of that product. The ruler of Qatar said that he was "eager" to get a pipeline built, which would run from Qatar's northern fields through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and into Turkey. It's definitely risky, and I'd agree with you on risk alone but the leadership has said that they wanted this pipeline built. I didn't look for any articles about their intention to sell off their natural gas in Europe, and will need to do some reading into that when I have time, but with the capability to exceed Russian supply I think the Russian government is rightfully worried. For the US, it's more about control of a larger area, in which Syria is one part. A memo from the Secretary of Defense back in 2001 talked about invading 7 nations, including Syria, with the reason (according to General Wesley Clark, if you choose to believe him) being control of natural gas and oil.
#147 - ajweston (09/06/2013) [-]
I don't believe in any agenda for the US to control the middle east and General Clark retired in early 2000. The thought of getting involved in the area for gas or oil is unbelievable as we don't get as much of both from Canada as we do from OPEC as a whole with major plans to decline the amount we import from overseas.
User avatar
#108 - drewbridge (09/05/2013) [-]
Sounds like a lot of apophenia and bullshit.

#116 - kmichel (09/05/2013) [-]
Bullshit? Every sentence I wrote is backed up in major foreign media or in government documents. The connection between the events is straightforward and explains why Putin is against intervention, why the US wants to intervene, why we we're surprised by Britain's lack of enthusiasm for going to war...etc. Wars aren't fought for moral reasons like saving a people from genocide, but for natural resources or access to them, political sway in a region that will be useful in the future, and other similar things. Neither the US government or Russian government cares about chemical weapons being used or the people being killed, and why would they? If the US did, it wouldn't have used chemical weapons on civilians in Afghanistan. If we cared about the stability of a region over our own profit, we wouldn't have overthrown the leader or Iran, or supported brutal dictators and military factions in a dozen or so countries.
User avatar
#118 - drewbridge (09/05/2013) [-]
I didn't say your facts were wrong, I was saying the story doesn't make sense.

Being friendly and open is a whole lot fucking easier than going in, raping literally everything and declaring yourself King Shit.
User avatar
#13 - arkytior (09/04/2013) [-]
they are real... can't say for the second part
#8 - Lol I met Dean Norris at a 4th of July party, my dad's militar…  [+] (2 replies) 08/29/2013 on Breaking Bad ending 0
User avatar
#13 - CaptalnPlanet (12/26/2013) [-]
#12 - brenton (09/29/2013) [-]
#77 - Had to use my girl friends mac before and i didnt really like …  [+] (3 replies) 08/28/2013 on PC Glorious Master Race 0
User avatar
#78 - reaperssprint (08/28/2013) [-]
I like Window's eight even without a touch screen. It's convenient and microsoft office's back-up on it is a life saver.
#97 - anon (04/01/2015) [-]
still better than what #75 said
User avatar
#79 - GhandisPimpCane (08/29/2013) [-]
I was lucky, my uncle write for the Financial times and gave me a viao Duo11 he reviewed. It has free xbox music which is pretty much the best music internet radio player ever! Touch screen can be buggy sometimes and wish there were more apps in the store but heck I just download programs for what they dont have.
#413 - how's middle school going for you?  [+] (1 reply) 08/25/2013 on Fuck bees up -3
User avatar
#415 - SubjectThree (08/25/2013) [-]
Quite abuzz with activity, honey.

It's a real hive of activity and rumors honeycomb the whole facility.