What if Iraq was a "white" nation?

[Jedi Knight]

The points I am covering in this thread have to be debated. What this has to do with is the leftist tendency to think any system "outside" the US is some type of 'enlightened" system unworthy of actionable diversity. The only "system" worthy or in need of "diversity" is the United States. I think that is because of the leftist myth that the US is a "white" nation.

For example, yesterday a US Marine draped an American flag over the face of the Saddam Statue that was being torn down in the heart of Baghdad. The leftist media came unglued saying that it was an "imperialist" action which "inflamed" the "arabs". There are several problems with that leftist logic. The first is that the only "arabs" in the middle east are in Saudi Arabia.

The second problem is that the troops invading Iraq are, in fact, Americans. It is not a UN force. It is not a commie collective invading Iraq. It is the United States. When the US deploys troops, those troops can display the American flag at will, as they see fit. Anyone who says anything different is an anti-American commie.

Now, if America was the country being invaded, the leftists would demand to see the flags being displayed brazenly by the invading forces. What the left wants is to strip the sacrifice of the American soldiers and strip them of their history. That way when the soldiers get back to the states, six months later the "invasion" can be forgotten and "dismissed". That is what is in store for American soldiers when they get back from the war. It is something like the Vietnam War, only more politically sophisticated. When US troops get back they will not only be spit on by the left, but the left will also tell them that they did not serve America when they went to war. If the troops can't display the "flag", who did they really serve? The leftist UN?

The greatest hypocrisy will come not from the flag flap however, but from the lie called "diversity". Diversity only applies by the leftist internationalists to America and other leftist-defined "white nations", if the country is not the US.

Since Iraq is not a "white" nation, there will be no "diversity and multiculturalism" in Iraq. There will still be a single religion that the left will ensure keeps hating the west as the "great satan", and everyone in Iraq will look the same because there is no real diversity.

To the left, Iraq is diverse because it is non-white. It doesn't matter if there is zero emmigration to Iraq, or that Iraq has one religion which teaches the one race in Iraq to hate all other religions. No, to the left, that is model diversity. To the left, one race and one religion is "enlightenment".

If the situation in Iraq was happening in America, the left would demand that Anthrax, Sarin, Nuclear Weapons, Mustard Gas, genocide and every other tool of warfare be used against us because we are the leftist-defined evil "white" nation that needs davey-jones depth diversity programs of every type imagineable.

You could put 1,000,000,000,000 different races of humans in America, and the left would scream that America wasn't "diverse" enough. America also needs 1,000,000,000,000 more different religions, because religious "diversity" and enlightenment is a huge problem to the left and the more gods we pack into America the better.

So what we have, in sum, are US soldiers being denied they are US soldiers liberating Iraq, but we have yet to know whose forces they actually are yet. Then we have a country we liberated of one race and one religion that is defined by leftists as being more "diverse" than the United States, empowered by a single religion that is also being defined as the most "diverse" display of enlightenment the human race has ever seen.

I am thinking that millions of white people and black people need to go to the Middle East and move in. Millions of them. Then we need to see Christian churches built in the heart of Baghdad and Jehovah Witnesses running around Mecca freely proselytizing.

Then we need a few million Falong Gong folks in Tehran. That is what the world needs and the left needs to propagate for that to happen.

I want to see some "diversity" and "multiculturalism" in the middle east. The "one race" middle east has to go. That is the problem with the middle east, if you think about it. There is no racial diversity or cultural diversity there and the time is long overdue to inject some diversity into it. I want to see Iraqi chicks popping out babies from white guys who emmigrate there from America. That is diversity. I want to see the chicks in Tehran popping out Baptists. I want to see Billy Graham giving a stadium sermon standing on top of the meteorite in Mecca underneath the five pillars.

That is diversity.

JK

[Jedi Knight]

Oh, so some leftist gave my thread a one star rating without even posting a reply to it? No problem, I can play the one star game too.

JK

[EvilYeti]

Why would any white people want to move there to begin with? I've heard the middle east described as being alot like LasVegas, except there is no booze, the women are covered head-to-toe and they cut off your hands if they catch you gambling.

As far as I am concerned they can keep the MiddleEast, as long as they leave us alone and keep the cheap oil flowing.

[Tony]

Originally posted by EvilYeti
Why would any white people want to move there to begin with? I've heard the middle east described as being alot like LasVegas, except there is no booze, the women are covered head-to-toe and they cut off your hands if they catch you gambling.

As far as I am concerned they can keep the MiddleEast, as long as they leave us alone and keep the cheap oil flowing.

I loved the rant JK, but EvilYeti is right. The middle east is the arm pit of the world, you would have to pay me a substantial amount of money to live there.

[aerocontrols]

Jedi:

What do you know of the racial diversity in the Middle East?

How many non-Arabs in Iraq?

Kuwait?

Saudi Arabia?

Egypt?

One race Middle East indeed :rolleyes:

[Ian Osborne]

Told you - his underpants are too tight :rolleyes:

[Gem]

FYI: The us military is under a lot of pressure to not look like conquerors. Signs of a conquering army is to raise their flags on government buildings and stuff (Like when the Red army raised their flag over Berlin). The military is trying to avoid that sort of message, even if it is meant with good intentions.

It's all about appearances.
Whether they are liberators or conquerors, it's another thread. But they want to look like liberators, not conquerors, so that they can gain support. And the US military DID apologies for flag raising (in southern iraq as well).

Btw, the "Left" is wrong by associating raising the flag with conquering in this scenario.
You should bitch about how the Arabs complain about that sort of flag raising, it's a LOT more important to them than to the left.

OH, and I predict that the victory march at the NY WTC will be cheered by pro war people, not anti war people.

Gem
P.S.: If Iraq was "white" (as their skin color would be white) there wouldn't even be an Iraq war, since they would be good friends with their buddies in the US (for various political/economical/idealogical values).

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by Ian Osborne
Told you - his underpants are too tight :rolleyes:
:D

[Richard G]

OH, and I predict that the victory march at the NY WTC will be cheered by pro war people, not anti war people.

No doubt about it. The antis don't give a rats ass about Americas sons and daughters returning home from war. Thats who will be in the parade, and that is who we will be cheering.

[Jedi Knight]

Bump......

Come on leftists, explain to me why a little "diversity" and "multiculturalism" wouldn't be a good thing for Iraq and the middle east.

Explain to me how burning the American flag everywhere a human can hold it is "cool and fashionable", and yet when an American whips it out to cheering crowds in Baghdad it becomes "evil" and "sinister".

Come on lefties, don't ignore my potent post on Iraqi diversity. How is it that the entire middle east can be one race and the leftist peace protestors fight against deploying military power there to stop "one race" weapons of mass destruction development agendas driven by totalitarianism, and yet in America and the "west", race is something constantly put under the microscope of every interaction encountered in society?

Does the left support one-race middle east totalitarianism only because it is non-white or non-Jewish, or both? This question must be explored because I do not want to see the US military having to go clean up another leftist mess in Iraq in the future like it is now.

JK

[a_unique_person]

I like these polls, there is always a choice that is exactly what I think.

[subgenius]

Details Given on Contract Halliburton Was Awarded
By ELIZABETH BECKER


WASHINGTON, April 10 — The Pentagon contract given without competition to a Halliburton subsidiary to fight oil well fires in Iraq is worth as much as $7 billion over two years, according to a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers that was released today.

The contract also allows Kellogg Brown & Root, the Halliburton subsidiary, to earn as much as 7 percent profit. That could amount to $490 million


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/business/11REBU.html?ex=1050638400&en=8e3c238766503e7b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[richardm]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
For example, yesterday a US Marine draped an American flag over the face of the Saddam Statue that was being torn down in the heart of Baghdad. The leftist media came unglued saying that it was an "imperialist" action which "inflamed" the "arabs".


Thing is, it doesn't really matter what we think about it, the fact is that it did annoy and upset a lot of arabs. It's a question of making life a bit easier for ourselves, I think. By putting the US flag up, that marine ensured that most Middle-East papers had that picture on their front page, confirming what a lot of arabs already think about the war. It might just prolong the fighting, and lead to more coalition (we're there too, you know ;) ) deaths.

Other than that, I have been annoyed to hear senior ministers and Heads of State from the Middle East talk in terms of "Saddam might be bad, but he's an arab, so that makes it okay - certainly better than having lots of whites about the place".

[Jon_in_london]

JK's post may be mostly ramblimg nonsense but he does bring up a good point.

By the way JK, its not just America that needs diversity but any majority/historically white country.

Why is it that Ghandi can cry 'India for the Indians' and be hailed as a visionary?

Why is it that Mandela can cry 'Africa for the Africans' and be hailed as a Messiah?

Why is it that that a European can cry 'Europe for the Europeans' and be slammed as a Nazi, fascist, rascist pig?

I dont know the reason but it is why when a white person is beaten to death by a gang of blacks or asians in the UK, nothing is said, yet whenever a black/asian person is muredred or assaulted by a white person the crime makes headlines and is automatically assumed to be 'racially motivated'

It is why every meeting held or seat won by the British national party is opposed by the Anti-facsit league but no-one demonstrates against the Likes of Abu Hamza when he spits hate and vitriol against the people of this country.

It is why, when a war-hero pensioner is beaten to within an inch of his life in Bradford and the anger finally gets too much- the resulting riots are blamed exclusively on white rascists.

Its why whenever I try and argue this kind of point, no matter how solid my reasoning and logic, I am always trumped by the race card.

Its why i dont give a toss anymore when someone accuses someone else of being rascist because its just the typical knee-jerk response of the intellectually bankrupt, hand-wringing, bleeding-heart, guilt stricken, middle class lefty spunk-rag.

so there!

[max]

Jon
You took the very words out of my mouth

[Crossbow]

Jedi Knight said:

... the middle east is one race, ...

Since JK is as ignorant on this issue as he is with most others, here is an item that would encourage him to take a firm grip on his lightsaber.


Enlarge Your Breasts Quickly And Easily!
To Learn More, Click Here To Visit Our Website!

100% Naturally With No Surgery!
It will dramatically increase the size of any womans bust size
No negative side effects whatsoever
This product will help you achieve firmer, larger and more beautiful breasts!

Learn More, Click Here To Visit Our Website!


:p

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Crossbow
Jedi Knight said:

... the middle east is one race, ...

Since JK is as ignorant on this issue as he is with most others, here is an item that would encourage him to take a firm grip on his lightsaber.


Enlarge Your Breasts Quickly And Easily!
To Learn More, Click Here To Visit Our Website!

100% Naturally With No Surgery!
It will dramatically increase the size of any womans bust size
No negative side effects whatsoever
This product will help you achieve firmer, larger and more beautiful breasts!

Learn More, Click Here To Visit Our Website!


:p

But everything JK says is TRUE! I was having words with the Left in the pub last night (it was a big pub [well, not that big]) and they admitted that all JK's accusations are quite correct. They admitted that they all held precisely the same viewpoint and have complete consensus on everything (well, apart whether they can believe it's not butter). They told me to offer everyone their most humble apologies and they'd try to do better next time.

At least they got the rounds in!

Btw I'd like to see Billy Graham under a meteorite--any meteorite, I'm not going to demand equal opps or affirmative action to choose it!--but that's just my opinion.

[Tony]

Originally posted by BillyTK


Btw I'd like to see Billy Graham under a meteorite--any meteorite, I'm not going to demand equal opps or affirmative action to choose it!--but that's just my opinion.


Do you usually wish death on people who disagree with you?

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
JK's post may be mostly ramblimg nonsense but he does bring up a good point.

By the way JK, its not just America that needs diversity but any majority/historically white country.
Well, in the UK it's 'cos we have diversity whether people like it or not so we should start dealing with it.

Why is it that Ghandi can cry 'India for the Indians' and be hailed as a visionary?
Because he was protesting British occupation of his country?

Why is it that Mandela can cry 'Africa for the Africans' and be hailed as a Messiah?
I'll pass on this one, I didn't realise he had.

Why is it that that a European can cry 'Europe for the Europeans' and be slammed as a Nazi, fascist, rascist pig?
Because the whole "Europeans for Europe" cry is generally of sole concern to people who are Nazi fascist racists, or is used as a way to polarise what is really a complex issue. And remember, a non-european is simply someone who hasn't yet joined the EC! ;)
I dont know the reason but it is why when a white person is beaten to death by a gang of blacks or asians in the UK, nothing is said, yet whenever a black/asian person is muredred or assaulted by a white person the crime makes headlines and is automatically assumed to be 'racially motivated'
I'm not aware of any "reverse-racially motivated" muders being censored by the media; in fact, just the opposite, particularly with the way that certain groups try to make politically capital out of such incidents.

It is why every meeting held or seat won by the British national party is opposed by the Anti-facsit league but no-one demonstrates against the Likes of Abu Hamza when he spits hate and vitriol against the people of this country.
Because the BNP are manipulative scum who play on people's fears and insecurities to gain political power (okay so I've just described our three main parties but you know what I mean ;) ) and who are to cowardly to admit their racist agenda; at least Abu Hamza is open about his extemism. He's also been stripped of his UK citizenship under Section 4 of the Asylum, Immigration and Nationality Act which, although I've no time for or interest in this guy's views, is worrying.

It is why, when a war-hero pensioner is beaten to within an inch of his life in Bradford and the anger finally gets too much- the resulting riots are blamed exclusively on white rascists.
Because Bradford is an area with a high Asian population and riots generally are incited by people who want to polarise a situation for political gain.

Its why whenever I try and argue this kind of point, no matter how solid my reasoning and logic, I am always trumped by the race card.

Its why i dont give a toss anymore when someone accuses someone else of being rascist because its just the typical knee-jerk response of the intellectually bankrupt, hand-wringing, bleeding-heart, guilt stricken, middle class lefty spunk-rag.

so there!
Good for you! I like people who are prepare to stand up for themselves! ;) :D

Edited for unbelievably crap spelin

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Tony

Do you usually wish death on people who disagree with you?
Yeah--so just watch your step, son! :p

[Tony]

Originally posted by BillyTK

Yeah--so just watch your step, son! :p

Well, I know I dont have much to fear, you wont be armed. :D

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by BillyTK

Well, in the UK it's 'cos we have diversity whether people like it or not so we should start dealing with it.


Whats there to deal with? its 99.999% fine except when people go around saying we are 'instituationaly rascist' :rolleyes: x1000

Originally posted by BillyTK

Because the whole "Europeans for Europe" cry is generally of sole concern to people who are Nazi fascist racists, or is used as a way to polarise what is really a complex issue. And remember, a non-european is simply someone who hasn't yet joined the EC! ;)


Its generally the sole concern of Nazis because they arent afraid of just coming out with their rascism. Most other people wont say anything like it because they dont want to get tarred with the same brush. Its like the England flag- people associate it with hooligans and BNPers- doesnt mean theres anything wrong with the flag and it doesnt make me a BNP supporter if I chose to display one or say 'Im proud to be English' although most grauniad readers would say that I am.

Since India is for the Indians and Africa is for the Africans, I will continue to argue in favour of Europe for the Europeans and Britain for the Britons.

Originally posted by BillyTK

"reverse-racially motivated"


We can stop right there! what the hell is reverse-rascism? what you are actually saying is that rascism is the exclusive domain of white people and that non-white people are intrinsically incapable of rascism. This is why you need a special term 'reverse-rascism'. Rascism is rascism and the fact that you find the need to invent new terms to describe non-whaite rascists is inherently rascist.

The last time I heard about an assault against a white person being racially motivated was the Bradford riots. On the other hand, only a week or two ago a white person stabbed a black person and immediately it was broadcast on the radio as racially motivated! :eek:

Originally posted by BillyTK


Because Bradford is an area with a high Asian population and riots generally are incited by people who want to polarise a situation for political gain.



You just proved my point- its all the whiteys fault says you!!

Of course the gang of thugs who kicked the s__t out of the old bu@@er should prolly be given medals for standing up to 'institutional rascism' according to you?

[Tony]

I agree with you Jon, from what I have read in the news and on various message boards (including the BNP mssg board) England is mired in a wave of bedwetting political correctness. The BNP is a direct backlash to such thought.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Tony
I agree with you Jon, from what I have read in the news and on various message boards (including the BNP mssg board) England is mired in a wave of bedwetting political correctness. The BNP is a direct backlash to such thought.

*disclaimer* I must just say here that i find the BNP absolutely disgusting, they are a bunch of thugs and I do not subscribe to their rascist/anti-semetic point of view.

That being said- Tony, I think you are right.

[DrBenway]

To the Ba'athists and Arab nationalists I would say, "What you're advocating is racism, which is unjust. People ought to be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin."

To the Islamists, I would say, "The Qu'ran teaches that there can be no compulsion in religion, and that no human authority should stand between Allah and a human being. Therefore, it is wrong for a government presiding over both Muslims and non-Muslims to oppress the non-Muslims politically."

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

Whats there to deal with? its 99.999% fine except when people go around saying we are 'instituationaly rascist' :rolleyes: x1000
The fact that we have a wide range of ethnicities yet people are still rolling round with the message of "Britain for the British" (meaning white British)? The fact that the BNP are one the rise terrorising the good white folks with tales of "immigrants" taking over their towns, and being flooded by "asylum seekers"? Because there's all the usual problems of urban deprivation, drugs and drug-related crime, but people would prefer to cast that as asians vs whites?

Its generally the sole concern of Nazis because they arent afraid of just coming out with their rascism. Most other people wont say anything like it because they dont want to get tarred with the same brush. Its like the England flag- people associate it with hooligans and BNPers- doesnt mean theres anything wrong with the flag and it doesnt make me a BNP supporter if I chose to display one or say 'Im proud to be English' although most grauniad readers would say that I am.

Since India is for the Indians and Africa is for the Africans, I will continue to argue in favour of Europe for the Europeans and Britain for the Britons.

But what does Britain for the British or Europe for the Eurpeans actually mean, Jon? We're a nation of immigrants! Our culture and much of our language were brought over by French invaders! Why does it always come down to Britain for (white) British (btw, I'm not accusing you of suggesting such, but this is my experience of what the damn phrase inevitably means).

We can stop right there! what the hell is reverse-rascism? what you are actually saying is that rascism is the exclusive domain of white people and that non-white people are intrinsically incapable of rascism. This is why you need a special term 'reverse-rascism'. Rascism is rascism and the fact that you find the need to invent new terms to describe non-whaite rascists is inherently rascist.
I did use quotes around the term, but let's follow the logic: if a white person kills a black person and it's racism because the white person hates black people, then surely if a black person kills a white person it's different kind of racism, because that black guy's not doing it because he hates black people?

The last time I heard about an assault against a white person being racially motivated was the Bradford riots. On the other hand, only a week or two ago a white person stabbed a black person and immediately it was broadcast on the radio as racially motivated! :eek:
It's a complex issue. Sadly, the media doesn't like complexity. "Racially motivated.." makes for bigger headlines rather than waiting to confirm it is racially motivated.

You just proved my point- its all the whiteys fault says you!!
No I didn't. I said "generally"; I didn't say all. For instance, the 2001 riot happened because the National Front planned to parade through Bradford (whyinhell would they want to do that when there's such a large Asian population there?) and ignore the Home Secretary's ban on the march. Sometimes these disturbances are provoked, often its frustrations about other things that always *just seem to happen* to spill over into racial tensions.
Of course the gang of thugs who kicked the s__t out of the old bu@@er should prolly be given medals for standing up to 'institutional rascism' according to you?
:rolleyes:

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Tony


Do you usually wish death on people who disagree with you?

Moral indignation from Tony! Yet another fine example of an e-moralist.

I suggest that we ponder his words in order to properly evaluate the question he has asked.

Evil American SHOOT BULLETS AT PROTESTORS!
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17163

Originally posted by Tony

Hopefully, next time they will use real bullets.

Alas, other candidate for a bullet in the head.

Im advocating the same thing he is: ..the death of innocent people.

These people werent "speaking out against the government". They were seeking to sabotage the effort to get supplies to the troops at war.

If you attack the police, and sabotage the war effort you are not innocent.

This whole culture is a disease on humanity.

The extremists ARE the bulk of palestinians. The moderates are the minority.

It doesnt qualify as truth. These photos are evidence that the palistinians are barbaric. Just like this photo is evidence that this guy is a religious fanatic.

I advocated shooting people for attemting to sabotage the war effort.



Well Tony, you are all for killing of people that do not agree with your view, so why should you be surprised if there are others who would like to kill those who do not agree with their view?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by BillyTK


I did use quotes around the term, but let's follow the logic: if a white person kills a black person and it's racism because the white person hates black people, then surely if a black person kills a white person it's different kind of racism, because that black guy's not doing it because he hates black people?



No. Rascism can be most accurately defined as discrimination or predjudice based on race. Thus racism is racism no matter what.

You seem to think that its just a fantasy that there are hoardes of 'asylum seekers' ( :rolleyes: ) and illegal immigrants kicking it around. I be interested to know where 'bouts you live Billy, Ill wager its not on a Brixton housing estate though.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Crossbow



Well Tony, you are all for killing of people that do not agree with your view, so why should you be surprised if there are others who would like to kill those who do not agree with their view?

:rolleyes:

I already explained my position. Those people (in the context of my quotes) are not people with whom I find myself in mere disagreement. They are enemies of my country and the free people of the world.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


No. Rascism can be most accurately defined as discrimination or predjudice based on race. Thus racism is racism no matter what.


Before you get into this too deeply with him, you might look here (http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=192061&highlight=racism#post192061) to see where he's going with it. Billy and I have had a lengthy exchange, wherein he tried to explain to me why it is that only whites can be racist.

MattJ

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


No. Rascism can be most accurately defined as discrimination or predjudice based on race. Thus racism is racism no matter what.
Okay, accepting this definition for the sake of the argument (which as Aerocontrols has kindly provided a link for, I don't necessarily agree with) then a racist attack is one where a perpetrator is acting on their racist attitudes, regardless of the colour of the victim. But it's not always the case that racism is involved when attacker and victim are of a different colour; unforutnately some people are always in a rush to label any case as such, regardless of the evidence.
You seem to think that its just a fantasy that there are hoardes of 'asylum seekers' ( :rolleyes: ) and illegal immigrants kicking it around. I be interested to know where 'bouts you live Billy, Ill wager its not on a Brixton housing estate though.
I KNOW it's a fantasy that there are hoards of asylum seekers about to overwhelm Britain; I wouldn't call 111,000 asylum applications (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2852129.stm) a hoard exactly. And no, I'm not naive enough to believe there's no illegal immigrants, or problems associated with illegal migrancy (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2793351.stm), but I don't believe there's a hoard of them about to overwhelm the UK either.
FWIW, I live in Huddersfield, which is a town approx. 10 miles south west of Bradford.

[subgenius]

By the way, there was an order not to display American flags, so it wasn't the Left that had a problem with it, unless Tommy Franks is also in on the conspiracy.

[Checkmite]

Since Arabic and Asian-Minor peoples are technically caucasian, Iraq already is a "white" nation.

Unless you intend "white" to mean "of purely European descent", of course.

[The Fool]

Jedi.
you are at your most entertaining when you are in conspiracy theory mode, I love it when your stories have commies eating babies, UN smuggling soviet tanks into texas, Leftists put mind control drugs in the water, America invaded with the support of the 80% of the population that are secretly aliens....Its priceless stuff:)

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool
Jedi.
you are at your most entertaining when you are in conspiracy theory mode, I love it when your stories have commies eating babies, UN smuggling soviet tanks into texas, Leftists put mind control drugs in the water, America invaded with the support of the 80% of the population that are secretly aliens....Its priceless stuff:)

Hey you should check out the pics I posted of structures on Mars today, including a statue of a roman chick.

JK

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Hey you should check out the pics I posted of structures on Mars today, including a statue of a roman chick.

JK
cool, a roman chick? Is rome on Mars? I always thought it was in Italy Somewhere.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool

cool, a roman chick? Is rome on Mars? I always thought it was in Italy Somewhere.

No, the Roman chick just looks like a Roman chick. I don't know if the Romans ever went to Mars or not. I am thinking maybe the Mars humans came to Earth and started Rome.

JK

[Vorticity]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight

...
I don't know if the Romans ever went to Mars or not.
...
Wow, that actually says a lot.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Vorticity

Wow, that actually says a lot.

Really?

JK

[Vorticity]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
I don't know if the Romans ever went to Mars or not.
I'm sorry, but I can't possibly pass that up as a sig.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Vorticity

I'm sorry, but I can't possibly pass that up as a sig.

Display it. :D

Fill your entire signature block space with Jedi quotes.

JK