Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu


Rank #10832 on Comments
no avatar Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius
Send mail to reteip Block reteip Invite reteip to be your friend
Last status update:
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:11/26/2011
Last Login:10/23/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#10832
Highest Content Rank:#22226
Highest Comment Rank:#4724
Content Thumbs: 5 total,  6 ,  1
Comment Thumbs: 1524 total,  1793 ,  269
Content Level Progress: 15.25% (9/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 47% (47/100)
Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Content Views:559
Total Comments Made:471
FJ Points:1381

latest user's comments

#23 - Picture 10/14/2014 on Comrade, what the shit +15
#106 - Blessed be Admin! 09/25/2014 on autoplay is kill 0
#36 - Picture 09/25/2014 on Ivan and Dimitry Thread +2
#580 - **reteip rolled user argoniansrule ** 09/18/2014 on Nemesis +1
#40 - Picture 09/17/2014 on A sad day in the internet... +1
#164 - Picture 09/15/2014 on hate to say it... +5
#4 - Picture  [+] (4 new replies) 09/12/2014 on Mini shark +33
User avatar #6 - Ashtaroth (09/12/2014) [-]
It looks like a shark version of Irving the Bee. Like it was intentionally done crudely. Poor shark.
#5 - boomerpyro (09/12/2014) [-]
add a blush and a shiny eye thing.
#15 - fakefalsofake (09/12/2014) [-]
Am I kawaii enough for you sempai? pls notice me
#19 - boomerpyro (09/12/2014) [-]
yes my imouto, you are the apple of my vision organ
#9 - Swell with tiny member states! 09/12/2014 on Meanwhile In Germany +3
#22 - You can, sort of.  [+] (4 new replies) 09/11/2014 on Amazing "robin hood" darts 0
User avatar #42 - cormy (09/11/2014) [-]
You can 100%, you just need one of the hollow aluminum ones. Or you just need to hit a wood one so hard that it splits.

User avatar #48 - alucardhell (09/11/2014) [-]
You actually can't do it with a wooden arrow because of how wooden arrows are made. The wood fibers aren't continuous down the length of the arrow, so when the second arrow hits it follows the path of the wood fibers and just chips off a section from the back half of the arrow, but never making it past part way before leaving the arrow and hitting next to the original arrow.
User avatar #74 - cormy (09/12/2014) [-]
I don't know how much experience you have with wood but it wouldn't be hard to make an arrow out of a piece of wood where the fibers are in fact continuous throughout its length. I don't know how they're normally made, no doubt in some mass-producing facility that doesn't really check for such imperfections but it should be doable.
Also, your arrow must have an actual flat tip like those used for piercing between deer ribs instead of our usual smooth-pointed ones in order to feed it nicely down the middle of the shaft.
#13 - Raid on the Medway, second Anglo-Dutch war, Dutch ships burnin…  [+] (21 new replies) 09/03/2014 on RIP in pieces 0
#28 - xxxsonic fanxxx (09/03/2014) [-]
kankerstoer joh
#17 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
Battle of Copenhagen: A British force, led by then Vice Admiral Nelson (who only had one eye i may add) destroyed the Dutch fleet at anchor which led to the Dutch being knocked out of the Napoleonic wars completely.

Don't tempt the British my friend, we have beaten you many more times than you have us.
User avatar #31 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
May I ask for a specific source?

The Battle of Copenhagen was a naval engagement between the British and Denmark-Norway, to prevent the danish fleet from threatening british naval superiority. The Netherlands were a client state of the French Republic and under their management.
There are no sources that indicates that the dutch were participating in the battle, and there's no connection between this event and dutch participation in the wars.
User avatar #32 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
It was a Dutch fleet at Copenhagen. I'm getting the bulk of my infro from a five minute chat in my History class, we kinda skipped over the battle because it wasn't a part of the syllabus, but it was definitely a dutch fleet.

And i wouldn't really call them a client state, more " A dirty double corssing state who took the first chance to get their greedy hands on better trade ports so decided to declare war on Britain because it looked like Napoleon was going to win."

But hey, different countried call it different things i suppose.
User avatar #34 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
Funny, because in my history class, we were told it was the danish fleet at quarters at their main base in Copenhagen.

Popular opinion agrees:

About the part of the Netherlands being, "a dirty douple corssing state...", it may be noted that it was the Batavian Republic, which was formed out of economic and political turmoil, afterwards being invaded by France and made into a yes-puppet.


Maybe the british should be more grateful to the dutch. Esspecially at the Battle of Waterloo.

User avatar #35 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Yeah, i really don't think we should thank you for waterloo... at all. Waterloo was a triumph for the British because of Wellington. We had less men and less equipment than Napoleon (even with all the extra soldiers from the Netherlands, Hannover and what not) and it was Wellingtons skill that won the day, not the fucking Dutch.

The Dutch involvement really does show the integrity of the Dutch people; "The French are about to win! Quick, attack the brittish!@

"Oh shit they defeated us! Now the French are about to lose! Quick, help the British!"

"We won! We truly are the best!"

Also, are you trying to defend your own country by passing blame onto a completely unrelated country? That doesn't change the fact that the Dutch have no integrity whatsoever and just want fucking trade routs.

Also, the Dutch should be thanking the British who, during WW2, housed the Dutch Royal family who fled. Where as the British Royal family refused to flee to Canada even though the Nazis were knocking down our door.

Also, before you say we weren't invaded, consider this; at the time they refused to flee our army was in tatters, Hitler was on the beaches of France with lust in his eyes and we were expecting an invasion any day. The British Royal Family refused to flee because they knew it wasn't the right thing for a Monarch to do. If Britain was going down, they were going down with the ship. But theres the Dutch Family, running away on a British ship.
User avatar #38 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
The Hitler-card... Really?

I couldn't give a single flying fuck about who and whoever is more powerfull than the other. It's in the past, and using ones past as justification for the present is silly. History is the mere study of the past and to give us a cultural understanding of our present.
One thing that rustles my jimmies though, are neckbeards who blindly throws out historical anecotes, without any confirmation or sources to back them up.

It's pathetic to see how people ignorantly blind themself from an objectiv view, to satisfy their own ideal imagination of the past.
User avatar #39 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
Thats exactly what you have been doing.

And the Hitler card? I didn't pull the Hitler card. The Hitler card comes out when you compare someone with Hitler, WHERE did I do that?
User avatar #40 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
No... I question what I read and what I hear.
You took the discussion out of its premissed and context, by drawing it into a new field, were you try to show of a anecdote, which you know nobody can mess with.

Call it Hitler-card, WWII-card or Churchill... I do not care.
User avatar #41 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
A new field? My Friend, we are talking about wars of our past and, if I am not mistaken, World War 2 was, in fact, a war.

If we go down the "you took the discussion of out its premise and context" may i avert your attention to your previous comment where you, out of nowhere, brought up the Batavian Republic which had absolutely no connection with what we were talking about/no connection with the discussion.

Lets just get things straight before accusing one another (i.e. you accusing me) of taking things in the wrong direction.

Also, I love how defeated you are; "Call it Hitler Card, WW2 Card of Chirchil... I do not care." As soon as you have nothing to say its all "I don't care anyway!"

User avatar #42 - anoxz (09/04/2014) [-]
What is really pathetic, is randomly tossing historical inaccuracies with no sources or confirmation... stating it as fact. But I already noted that earlier.

If however we are talking war, then why didn't you use your WWII argument at the beginning? Continue that, and I hope that you will back your sources up next time and try to be just little more objective.

User avatar #43 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/04/2014) [-]
I don't need to back them up, a quick five minute google search will confirm most of what I say.

If you're to lazy to go an look, thats fine. But that doesn't automatically mean i'm wrong. I know what i'm talking about, if you want to research it that is your prerogative.
User avatar #44 - anoxz (09/05/2014) [-]
Well a five minute google search didn't confirm the precence of a Dutch fleet at the Battle of Copenhagen. It clearly show you don't know what you talk about.
#37 - anoxz has deleted their comment.
User avatar #18 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
Wait hold on

Are those two ships closest to us on the left firering howitzers?

That was effective enough for them to actually use that at that time?
User avatar #33 - anoxz (09/03/2014) [-]
Those ships are "Bomb Vessels" or later "Monitore" which carries few guns, and instead uses mortars for attacking coastal installation.
User avatar #36 - flybager (09/04/2014) [-]
Ah, so mortars.
I thought at first howitzers, which seemed odd to me.
Thanks for the info.
User avatar #22 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
I don't fucking know, i'm not an Historical Artist. I just fucking googled Battle of Copenhagen and that was the coolest picture that came up.

Its the text that you should be looking at not questioning if the picture i provided is Historically accurate.
User avatar #24 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
That drawings probably not going for historical accuraty.
and neither's the first one. besides, what's that guy's problem anyways. Trying to show off.

I'd tell by how it's just a one-sided pure ass-whoopin'.
There'd be losses & damage on both sides, given the enemy fired back.
Though your picture's a fuck'n awesome show-off of naval stragety in large quantaties
User avatar #26 - aabbccddeeffgghhii (09/03/2014) [-]
There would be losses on both sideds but Nelson was so BAD ASS that he still destroyed the Dutch fleet (which i may add had superior numbers).

I just DESTROYED that guys National Pride and Achievements! FUCK YEAH BRITAIN

User avatar #25 - flybager (09/03/2014) [-]
Sort by:


Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1250

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#3 to #2 - reteip ONLINE (06/25/2014) [-]
Blessings of the sloth upon thee sir presidentmoose!
User avatar #4 to #3 - presidentmoose (06/25/2014) [-]
OP always delivers
 Friends (0)