NationStates Jolt Archive

the US would have won

Prove that.

China!

Oh...COME ON!

Can anyone be this ignorant of history?
I meant Japan,it was a typo. I was just thinking China about something else

thank you, thats what Ive been trying to tell you.

Dont quote out of context. Read the rest of the post. The US and Russia wouldnt have won without Britian and the US and Britian couldnt have won without Russia. It was a colaberative effort.

No, we werent cowards, it wasnt in our interests until China attacked us in Pearl Harbor. Is that better?

:p :D :p

You do realise that China was our ally don't you?:rolleyes:

Oncer again you ignore the whole post and only take what suits you...
did he or did he not say that? thank you

I say, that's a brilliantly concise post - are you studying history at Uni somewhere?

EDIT: The BEF did have some armoured units - Matilda's, I believe. They tried to take on Rommel's Panzer Group at...Sedan or the Somme, my knowledge is fuzzy there...but nearly suceeded until the Germans 88mm were turned against the British tanks.
Indeed, I should have said that the BEF hadn't brought any massed tank units, of the sort the Germans had, into France. They did bring the Matilda Mk. IIs, but not in full armored units. And the 88's did a number on them, not only in France, but in North Africa as well. Only German weapon that could reliably punch through the Matilda mk II's armor at the time, actually.

I admit, I cannot remember the name of the engagement...I'd think it was probably at the Somme, as Sedan was awfully far south and well behind the German lines.

Prove that.
well we did win the war..

did he or did he not say that? thank you

You took it out of context. The entire post showed that the Allied victory was created by all three major powers.

did he or did he not say that? thank you

God, that's the worst defense I've ever seen! He DID say that, but he also stated that the US couldn't have won without Britain and Russia.

well we did win the war..

France also won the war. They're here now, aren't they?

France also won the war. They're here now, aren't they?
france didnt win the war we won it for them

Indeed, I should have said that the BEF hadn't brought any massed tank units, of the sort the Germans had, into France. They did bring the Matilda Mk. IIs, but not in full armored units. And the 88's did a number on them, not only in France, but in North Africa as well. Only German weapon that could reliably punch through the Matilda mk II's armor at the time, actually.

I admit, I cannot remember the name of the engagement...I'd think it was probably at the Somme, as Sedan was awfully far south and well behind the German lines.

I'm fairly sure it was the Somme...it rings a bell. I also don't know if you could help me here. I was trying to refute USA's point earlier and came up with the incident of the French Officer Cadets holding their academy grounds and a vital bridge against a German armoured attack for a day or so with only a few old anti-tank weapons and several light tanks, eventually being over-run and suffering heavy casualties. Was it at Sedan? I honestly can't remember.

it was the way it was worded ok

Suuuuuuure.

Oh and:

I meant Japan,it was a typo. I was just thinking China about something else

Suuuuuure.

france didnt win the war we won it for them

Oh, of COURSE they didn't give us intelligence for D-Day, or hold out against superior numbers and equipment!

[/sarcasm]

He DID say that
doesnt change the fact he said it, you even admit it

did he or did he not say that? thank you

You heard of a thing called CONTEXT. Yes I said that Brtian and Russia couldnt have won without the US. But I also said that the US and Russia couldnt have won without Britan. And that the US and Brtiain couldnt have won without Russia. And what I didnt say (but which is eqally true) is that the US couldnt have won it alone.

I meant Japan,it was a typo. I was just thinking China about something else

Did or did you not say China. Thank you

Suuuuuuure.

Oh and:



Suuuuuure.
Im serious

doesnt change the fact he said it, you even admit it

Of course he said it. Dis he say that it wwas a total US effort? No, he didn't. He said that the US couldn't have won without help either!

doesnt change the fact he said it, you even admit it

Contex you moron. Its like if someone said "You can kill anyone if he's trying to kill you" and you took it out of context saying "You can kill anyone". It does not give justification for mass murder.

Yes, I did. Stupid, stupid of me, but I get a little overzealous at times. Plus my knowledge of WWII is quite widespread, but not detailed enough in places, so I don't know everything I perhaps should at times. Political Scientist? That's sounds rather interesting - what does it entail?
In the international arena it typically entails applying the theories of the social sciences (most of which are devised by the economists) to the actions of states. One needs a strong background in history for any branch of Poli Sci, but international relations is unique in the fact that states don't act in a vacuum.

Of course he said it. Dis he say that it wwas a total US effort? No, he didn't. He said that the US couldn't have won without help either!
doesnt change the fact the US helped win the war

19th page! :D

I love destroying troll's arguments over and over again!

Did or did you not say China. Thank you

Pwned! :p

Im serious

Which is the saddest thing about this whole thread.

doesnt change the fact the US helped win the war

Of course it doesn't! It's a very good thing that they did there!

But, it wasn't all them. Canada helped as well (though not much, our army's really small).

Indeed, I should have said that the BEF hadn't brought any massed tank units, of the sort the Germans had, into France. They did bring the Matilda Mk. IIs, but not in full armored units. And the 88's did a number on them, not only in France, but in North Africa as well. Only German weapon that could reliably punch through the Matilda mk II's armor at the time, actually.

I admit, I cannot remember the name of the engagement...I'd think it was probably at the Somme, as Sedan was awfully far south and well behind the German lines.
Well, according to one of my books, the engagement in question took place on the 21st of may attacking the right flank of the 7th panzer and SS Totenkopf. No name given to it though.

Oh, of COURSE they didn't give us intelligence for D-Day, or hold out against superior numbers and equipment!

[/sarcasm]
Gamelin responded to Churchill's question as to what should be done to break the German salient by describing the French Military's inability as due to:

"Inferiority of numbers, inferiority of equipment, inferiority of method."

Leckie adds that Gamelin should have included Inferiority of Leadership.

Well, according to one of my books, the engagement in question took place on the 21st of may attacking the right flank of the 7th panzer and SS Totenkopf. No name given to it though.

'The Miracle of Dunkirk' by Walter Lord says it's an attack by Major-General H E Franklyn south towards Arras. It was at Arras - I remember now. French armoured support didn't appear and the Germans decimated the British units.

Canada helped as well (though not much, our army's really small).
thats because you leach off of ours

I'm fairly sure it was the Somme...it rings a bell. I also don't know if you could help me here. I was trying to refute USA's point earlier and came up with the incident of the French Officer Cadets holding their academy grounds and a vital bridge against a German armoured attack for a day or so with only a few old anti-tank weapons and several light tanks, eventually being over-run and suffering heavy casualties. Was it at Sedan? I honestly can't remember.
I'd imagine it was at Sedan, that was well within the French lines, and the Germans had come through there in the past (Franco-Prussian War, instance where Napoleon III met his big defeat.)

The battle at the Somme that springs immediately to mind is from the first World War, and it's notable for the British use of tanks. It would make sense that the Brits would fight their tanks there, it is good ground for tanks, not to mention it was on the edge of the German salient (I hate using that word, because a salient is generally smaller than what we're talking about, but it's a good word for this situation) and the territory defended by the BEF.

No, we werent cowards, it wasnt in our interests until China attacked us in Pearl Harbor. Is that better?

Looks like that expensive private education is paying off for you. Thank god you didn't go to public school; you might have said something stupid.

thats because you leach off of ours

You've got to be kidding.

Our army's small due to a lack of a monolithic defense budget, which we don't have or ned because WE DON'T INVADE PEOPLE EVERY DECADE!

Not to mention we have allies.

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.They're ineffective if the public education system is underfunded. And how many people can actually afford private education? Btw, my sister went to Ketchikan, Alaska for a basketball invitation last year. Comparing the public education of both communities with a same population but different jurisdiction, Ketchikan's high school is under maintained, overpopulated, and has larger classroom sizes than the two high schools back home.

thats because you leach off of ours

I think (by your logic, which is intrinsicly flawed) its more likely to be the other way round. Surely its Canda's army is so small becuase you leach off theirs. You've sucked theirs dry and so yours is huge.

'The Miracle of Dunkirk' by Walter Lord says it's an attack by Major-General H E Franklyn south towards Arras. It was at Arras - I remember now. French armoured support didn't appear and the Germans decimated the British units.
Yes, it was Arras. Thanks for finding that.

Which is the saddest thing about this whole thread.
actually that would be liberals

actually that would be liberals

No, actually it's you. Insulting liberals for no reason is incredibly immature.

I'd imagine it was at Sedan, that was well within the French lines, and the Germans had come through there in the past (Franco-Prussian War, instance where Napoleon III met his big defeat.)

The battle at the Somme that springs immediately to mind is from the first World War, and it's notable for the British use of tanks. It would make sense that the Brits would fight their tanks there, it is good ground for tanks, not to mention it was on the edge of the German salient (I hate using that word, because a salient is generally smaller than what we're talking about, but it's a good word for this situation) and the territory defended by the BEF.

Yep. Another of my favourite books, Knights of the Black Cross by Bryan Perrett goes into more detail - the British 50th Division and 1st Army Tank Brigade hit the German advance and nearly cut it off, as the German 37mm couldn't take on the Matilda's armour, before Rommel turned the 88mm's on the British forces.

Yes, it was Arras. Thanks for finding that.

You're welcome. It feels much better to be talking with people who actually have an idea of history, and don't endlessly troll.

actually that would be liberals

Actually it would be sacks full of drowned, new born kittens, but since they've yet to make an appearance on this thread we'll have to stick with... well, just you in general (not wishing to limit ourselves here) which incidentally is a close runner up to the kittens.

I seriously can't stop laughing.

I seriously can't stop laughing.
I know, liberals arguments are funny, its kinda sad though

You're welcome. It feels much better to be talking with people who actually have an idea of history, and don't endlessly troll.

But ridiculing retards is so much fun! It's like being at the zoo all over again.

I know, liberals arguments are funny, its kinda sad though

Um, no. I was laughing at you. I may not agree with liberals, but I'm no idiot like you.

But ridiculing retards is so much fun! It's like being at the zoo all over again.
I think your talking about liberals

Um, no. I was laughing at you. I may not agree with liberals, but I'm no idiot like you.
Im not an idiot, I preach the thruth

I think your talking about liberals

Why do you hate liberals so much? Just wondering.

I give him a comedy rating of 3/10.
He took the charactor too far, although it still makes you laugh inside.
Try again next puppet I say.

Im not an idiot, I preach the thruth

If you are the truth, then I am Chuck Norris. And I'm definately not Chuck Norris.

Why do you hate liberals so much? Just wondering.
Because they dont know what they are talking about.

Im not an idiot, I preach the thruth
The above sentence is an excellent example as to why schools are important.

Because they dont know what they are talking about.

And how can you prove that statement?

Why do you hate liberals so much? Just wondering.

Well, they are a bunch of bumbling idiots, I'll give him that, although I have to admit, saying that the Chinese bombed us at Pear Harbor is not exactly winning him any popularity contests.... :p

The above sentence is an excellent example as to why schools are important.

Sorry to double post, but Amen to that.

I think your talking about liberals

Umm... nooo - I think it's pretty clear in the word contruction there; re-tards as opposed to lib-e-rals. Fairly clear distinction there.

Well, they are a bunch of bumbling idiots, I'll give him that, although I have to admit, saying that the Chinese bombed us at Pear Harbor is not exactly winning him any popularity contests.... :p
I meant the Japanese

I meant the Japanese

that doesn't change the fact you said China

Umm... nooo - I think it's pretty clear in the word contruction there; re-tards as opposed to lib-e-rals. Fairly clear distinction there.
I dont see the difference

I dont see the difference

Then you qualify as the one starting with "R".

If you are the truth, then I am Chuck Norris. And I'm definately not Chuck Norris.
Of course, because Chuck Norris would roundhouse kick the truth into his mind.

Of course, because Chuck Norris would roundhouse kick the truth into his mind.

Definately. I can't even roundhouse kick!

Then you qualify as the one starting with "R".
Don't EVER, EVER insult retards like that!

Don't EVER, EVER insult retards like that!
I'm not insulting them, I'm insulting UN Ambassadorship.

I'm not insulting them, I'm insulting UN Ambassadorship.
And how dare you even suggest retards are that stupid and ignorant!

And how dare you even suggest retards are that stupid and ignorant!

Um, isn't that the definition of "Retard" now? It's no longer used politely to refer to thoise with problems.

I wish the age of posters showed up under their name... that tells me a lot more than location.

Some wish to keep that private though.

I was being sarcastic. I don't agree with you.

Incidently, did you learn to spell "abassadorship" in private school?
ZING!!! Good one Keru!! :)

Some wish to keep that private though.
Only the smart ones would.

Because they dont know what they are talking about.
My Irony-Detectomatic (tm) just went off the scale.

Only the smart ones would keep theirs private?

Only the smart ones would keep theirs private?
Smart 12 year olds, I meant. I'm guessing by this guys initial post and replies, that he is roughly 12.

Hey - He's gone offline - d'you think we'll see his puppet come along and start supporting his viewpoint?

I'd guess he's either that or a Net Rat.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/netrat.htm

Smart 12 year olds, I meant. I'm guessing by this guys initial post and replies, that he is roughly 12.
I bet you couldn't guess ages if you had pictures.

Oh really?

You are a funny man :D .
I agree. I always get a kick out of his threads, even if he sometimes go a bit over the top.

But he's still funny. :D

Seriously tough, what was the guy smoking?

those are just liberal lies, oil is going to be around for a very long time.

Yeah, like this US ARMY REPORT (http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=A440265&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf) on peak oil. That lying, liberal Army!

I can't believe this thread has gone on as long as it is. Every fucking thread you make is filled with ignorant, trashy trollishness. People just feed it - for the exercise, I guess, in pounding your stupidity into the ground only to watch you totally ignore it and just continue blurting out asinine statements like a baby vomiting blood after you feed it rat poison.

The only reason I attacked was to crush him repeatedly. It's fun, watching him pop up after EVERY LAST ATTACk. Then we do it all over again.

Seriously tough, what was the guy smoking?
nothing

Smart 12 year olds, I meant. I'm guessing by this guys initial post and replies, that he is roughly 12.
wrong

nothing

So, did they not teach you correct capitalization and punctuation at your fancy private school?

At any rate, I'm giving you one choice:

1. Be crushed once more.

2. End this.

Hey - He's gone offline - d'you think we'll see his puppet come along and start supporting his viewpoint?
funny, I had to go off so I could go on another forum

Are you responding to my post?

At any rate, I'm giving you one choice:

1. Be crushed once more.

2. End this.
You can never crush me

...

...

We've done it around seventeen times now.

So you pick to be crushed again?

Very well. I'll be waiting for a post.

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.
Why the military? It's as much of a socialist institution as the education system.

Do not feed the troll
Let it die.

Hey, it's fun debating.

I bet you couldn't guess ages if you had pictures.
Um...?

Theres nothing wrong with the class society, its a normal part of a thriving society. All it takes to move up the class ladder is hard work.
It's hard to get work if no-one wants to hire people with no education.

You're really scraping the bottom of the right-wing ideology barrel here. You would be better off educating yourself in one of those brilliant private schools, if you want to make better arguments.

Do not feed the troll
Let it die.
oh ,wow you can write it big letters do you feel special?

Why the military? It's as much of a socialist institution as the education system.
It needs to be, education doesnt

I can write big letters as well. Not to mention he's much more mature than you are.

...

...

We've done it around seventeen times now.

So you pick to be crushed again?

Very well. I'll be waiting for a post.
You mean me crushing you right?

It's hard to get work if no-one wants to hire people with no education.

You're really scraping the bottom of the right-wing ideology barrel here. You would be better off educating yourself in one of those brilliant private schools, if you want to make better arguments.
The right wing barrel is very deep, no need to scrape the bottom

Of course not. That's impossible, and you know it. Besides, it specifically said you'd be crushed!

At Second Point:

Well, both barrels are deep, and you're most definately scraping the bottom of the right-wing one.

It needs to be, education doesnt

Why can't we have a private army?

Why can't we have a private army?
Because it wouldnt work

Because it wouldnt work

Why?

Why?
Because there needs to be like order and a way of doing things so people dont get hurt.

Because it wouldnt work

Why not?

The title of the thread should have been "Welcome to NS General Comedy Hour", 'cause this is great stuff :)

So, did they not teach you correct capitalization and punctuation at your fancy private school?
Hooo! ;)
You're claim of going to a private school is going against your claim of how good it is.
ZING! :D
No, we werent cowards, it wasnt in our interests until China attacked us in Pearl Harbor. Is that better?
:p And the hits keep on coming...

Only in NS General will you not be surprised when the debate about banning public schools turns into an arguement about US actions in WWII.

...and a good time was had by all :fluffle:

Because there needs to be like order and a way of doing things so people dont get hurt.

And why could this not be provided by a private entity running the Army?

Indeed.

I meant the Japanese

Did you or did you not say china?

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.

Student apathy is the reson for said inefectivness. DC seems to be the only exeption to my aformentioned rule.

And why could this not be provided by a private entity running the Army?

Heck, he likes private schools, so why not a private armed forces?

I'm assuming UN Abassadorship is a puppet. Nobody in their right mind is this ignorant.
Well, he/she knows all about puppets. The tracking and snaring of a puppet::

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593819&postcount=23

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593828&postcount=24

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593854&postcount=28

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593860&postcount=30

Well, he/she knows all about puppets. The tracking and snaring of a puppet::

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593819&postcount=23

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593828&postcount=24

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593854&postcount=28

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593860&postcount=30

You have too much time on your hands.

Well, he/she knows all about puppets. The tracking and snaring of a puppet::

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593819&postcount=23

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593828&postcount=24

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593854&postcount=28

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593860&postcount=30
That was f'n hilarious btw.

UN abassadorship = Venezcuba

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10523763&postcount=523

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10523829&postcount=20

And liberals are liars?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10593854&postcount=28

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10601876&postcount=92

You have too much time on your hands.
I do, and it was fun!! :)

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10523829&postcount=20

I though she's a 15 year old male.:D

It needs to be, education doesnt
Why does it need to be any more than education needs to be? In my view the military and education are of equal importance.

The right wing barrel is very deep, no need to scrape the bottom
Congratulations, you've reached the bottom.

I though she's a 15 year old male.:D
Maybe it is an alter ego kinda thingy? :D

We dont need alternatives to fossil fuels and disaster aid is not the Government's responsbilit. Thats one of reasons why I cant understand why so many people are upset at the President over Katrina, he did way more than what should have been expected of him.

Disaster aid is not the responsibility of the government? Your wrong. Theres really no other way to say that.

Even a moron like Bush can admit were adicted to oil, how many more years will it take you?

Why would you intentionally mispell a part of your name?

Prove we don't need fossil fuel alternatives.

those are just liberal lies, oil is going to be around for a very long time.

What could possibly be the motive for this "liberal" lie?

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.
Yep. 'Cause having an illiterate in charge of a 100 million $ death-dealing machine makes soooooo much sense.

Then explain Singapore. One of the freest countries in the world, a champion of human rights, but very little military. They leachin' off us, too?

A champion of human rights....don't they cane you for graffiti or bubble gum possesion?

no.
Go home and think about what youve done.

LOL

Yep. 'Cause having an illiterate in charge of a 100 million $ death-dealing machine makes soooooo much sense.

Yeah, how will they know where to point a bazooka if they can't read "this end toward enemy".

A champion of human rights....don't they cane you for graffiti or bubble gum possesion?

Yes, and I support that (well, at least the first one. The second... not really, but I don't chew gum anyway.)

I'm assuming UN Abassadorship is a puppet. Nobody in their right mind is this ignorant.

Yah, even O'Reiley and Rumsfeld would kick this guys ass for being so right wing.

I dont follow

exactly

OK...

I've tried to be nice here, but you, UN Ambassadorship, are, in esscence, a mind-numbing, idiotic troll.

You deny all reason and insult people due to political stature without good reason. You are an American imperialist too.

You qualify as a Ferrous Cranius.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm



No, I think he's this guy

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/enfantprovocateur.htm

I'm sad, my well researched and logical posts that come to a delighful and correct center ground (free of propaganda, I might add) are being ignored.

Your not being ignored, usually you only get responses when people disagree :p

Thats the worst idea ever

Are you really, really sure you aren't twelve?

No, I think he's this guy

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/enfantprovocateur.htm

I'd say a mix. He's a troll, but he's also unmovable and never changes tactics.

I'm sad, my well researched and logical posts that come to a delighful and correct center ground (free of propaganda, I might add) are being ignored.


Oh, hush. We'll pay attention to you after we're done poking the troll with sticks. ;)

Yeah, how will they know where to point a bazooka if they can't read "this end toward enemy".
Or indeed which part of the grenade to throw: pin or lumpy boom-boom bit?

Oh, hush. We'll pay attention to you after we're done poking the troll with sticks. ;)
Fire works better 'ginst trolls. (nods sagely while puffing on pipe)

You qualify as a Ferrous Cranius.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
Naw, that's Eutrusca definitely.

And why could this not be provided by a private entity running the Army?
Because the Government is most effective in running the military, unlike the education system.

Why does it need to be any more than education needs to be? In my view the military and education are of equal importance.


actually the military is more important

Yah, even O'Reiley and Rumsfeld would kick this guys ass for being so right wing.
Those guys are liberals, especially O'Reilly, the way he defends illegal immigration is sad.

Those guys are liberals, especially O'Reilly, the way he defends illegal immigration is sad.

Lol, ok man your done.

Can you think of any other person that is a rightwinger by your standards?

Lol, ok man your done.

Can you think of any other person that is a rightwinger by your standards?

Venezcuba seems to agree with him.

Lol, ok man your done.

Can you think of any other person that is a rightwinger by your standards?
Rush, Hannity, Falwell, one of my bestfriends, among others

Rush, Hannity, Falwell, one of my bestfriends, among others
Now you make a lot more sense to me.

What could possibly be the motive for this "liberal" lie?
Because they want us to stop using oil because they think its "evil"

Disaster aid is not the responsibility of the government? Your wrong. Theres really no other way to say that.

Even a moron like Bush can admit were adicted to oil, how many more years will it take you?

Why would you intentionally mispell a part of your name?
1. No, your wrong its not the governments responsibility.

2. Bush aint a moron, but he did sell out to the liberals on this one

3. Cause I wanted to

.

2. Bush aint a moron, but he did sell out to the liberals on this one


Why do you believe scientists are liberals?

Why do you believe scientists are liberals?
Because they are just apart of the east coast educated elites if you will who think science is the answer and that everyone should be progressive when that aint true and they want us to stop using oil because its the planet blah blah blah.

Because they are just apart of the east coast educated elites if you will who think science is the answer and that everyone should be progressive when that aint true and they want us to stop using oil because its the planet blah blah blah.
You're adorable.

You're adorable.
What is that supposed to mean, are you hittin on me.

This is the funniest thread I have read in quite some time. I particularly liked the bit where China attacked Pearl Harbor. Thank you, UN "abassadorship," for giving me my laugh of the day!

You clearly have never studied sociology. It takes far far more than that. Go google a concept known as 'social capital' and get back to me. If you dont understand what you read, you have no authority to make the statement you have just made. Class systems are ultimately about far more than work.
it seems like a bunch of left-wing non-senseI think this post is the most ironic I've ever seen... :D

To sum up the people who are right:

OBJECTION! (http://ssv.jaccinc.com/media/ds/phoenixwright1.jpg)

Private schooling is not the be-all-end-all of fine education. Public schools have churned out students who became productive members of our society. So why get rid of an important institution just for some short-term superficial tax relief?

WW2 was won by the Allies which included America and OTHER IMPORTANT COUNTRIES.

Oil problems are a reality and alternatives are useful, they can help save us money on oil imports and give us a reason to stop being influenced by Saudi Arabia so much when we shouldn't.

You're just trolling now, so let this pointless thread die. Thank you.

those are just liberal lies, oil is going to be around for a very long time.
it's not. best case scenario 60-70 yrs for oil. 400-500 for natural gas. no geology tought in your fancy private schools?
good for me, as i work in the oil business and i'll be confortably retired bu the time shit hits the fan. not so good for anybody else.

ps
i know he's a troll and pulling my leg, but couldn't resist replying...

Why would you build a monument for surrender and failure?Exactly. We need to tear the Alamo down.

Exactly. We need to tear the Alamo down.

Yeah... who needs that monument to surrender and failure... how unamerican... :p

Because they are just apart of the east coast educated elites if you will who think science is the answer and that everyone should be progressive when that aint true and they want us to stop using oil because its the planet blah blah blah.

So how close does oil need to be to running out before we need to start developing alternative fuel sources?

God...

Oil. Is. Running. Out.

Get this through your thick skull.

Besides, using it is killing our planet. Couldn't we use something else? For fuel I say Biodiesel or Hydrogen.

Why? I should have to pay for other peoples problems. I just want to do my thing, get MY money(without it being taxed) and not worry about people.

Wait, I know this post is old, bu I have to shoot him down.

Why should you pay? Because it allows society to operate. Without tax, there can be no education, police, military, roads... anything.

Im not an idiot, I preach the thruth
Perhaps if you had attended a public school, you would have learned how to spell truth correctly and you wouldn't be making such idiotic statements?

Maybe we should examine your original post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10601533&postcount=1)?

Ban public schools

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.

If you think that you are such a glowing example of private school education, then your parents should ask for a refund? Your spelling and grammar are atrocious, and your knowledge of history is sadly lacking. Ambassadorship is spelled with an "m" and China did not attack the US at Pearl Harbor. "Peak oil" is not a "liberal lie" and the US did not "single handly" win WW2.

When you grow up, perhaps a career in your beloved military will help you to learn more about history and geography? It would appear that your "private school" education has been a "waste of money"?

It would appear that your "private school" education has been a "waste of money"?
...or that this is a deliberate attempt by someone to get people riled up...

...or that this is a deliberate attempt by someone to get people riled up...
The OP may very well be trolling, but considering some of his/her posts on these boards, I do believe that he/she is serious. If it is the latter, then I find that truly sad.

No, this has got to be trolling. If this is an honest belief... *feels nausea*

The OP may very well be trolling, but considering some of his/her posts on these boards, I do believe that he/she is serious. If it is the latter, then I find that truly sad.I've seen their posts too, but after reading through the entire thread and looking at how the responses were, it struck me as a remarkable coincidence that the posts were perfectly designed for riling up "liberals".

In my opinion, it is possible that we have found such a person with such a disagreeable personality and internet access. That it is a puppet with the intent to gather attention by deliberatly being what most "liberals" love to hate, is more likely though.

I've seen their posts too, but after reading through the entire thread and looking at how the responses were, it struck me as a remarkable coincidence that the posts were perfectly designed for riling up "liberals".

In my opinion, it is possible that we have found such a person with such a disagreeable personality and internet access. That it is a puppet with the intent to gather attention by deliberatly being what most "liberals" love to hate, is more likely though.
You may very well be correct in your observation, but if I were a "conservative", I sure as hell wouldn't want someone such as the OP espousing the conservative mantra. It would be too embarassing.

No, this has got to be trolling. If this is an honest belief... *feels nausea*
*CanuckHeaven passes Pythogria a barf bag.

You may very well be correct in your observation, but if I were a "conservative", I sure as hell wouldn't want someone such as the OP espousing the conservative mantra. It would be too embarassing.Some people are desperate for attention. A 28 page thread with people posting things like "How can you be such an idiot" is something some people are proud of achieving. For all we know, the owner isn't even conservative, probably apolitical.

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.
Imagine that: a fellow who can't correctly spell his own forum name is insisting that education is useless. Wonders never cease.

Imagine that: a fellow who can't correctly spell his own forum name is insisting that education is useless. Wonders never cease.

All you have are insults. Please keep this a realativly cognative debate.

(Even though I personaly don't give a crap)

We dont need alternatives to fossil fuels and disaster aid is not the Government's responsbilit. Thats one of reasons why I cant understand why so many people are upset at the President over Katrina, he did way more than what should have been expected of him.

First, private schools do not have an "standards" as public schools do. Every year public schools are graded on test scores and given a report card. does this happen in private schools? Nope! Private schools do not have to have standards when hiring their teachers, and can hire people who do not even have college degrees. Is this your criteria for excellence? Next, most state (New Jersey) schools have "Core Curriculum Content Standards" that all schools must adhere to. This ensures that a uniform curriculum is being taught to all students, regardless of their socioeconomic status. Finally, there is a higher level of care for students wth disabilities than in private schools. What would you have happen to children with autism, or Downs syndome, in your "world of perfect people?" The problem seems to be your are an elitist idealist without any true ideals.

Theres nothing wrong with the class society, its a normal part of a thriving society. All it takes to move up the class ladder is hard work.

Not in your system. In your proposed system it takes a lot of $ to get into a good private school. Also, when the US already spends 3 times the amount of the next 15 countries combined, what makes you think they need to spend more. Your ideas seem like the typical elitist concept of letting the poor fight your wars while you drink Brandy.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (pause for breath) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (hoarse) HAHAHAHAHAHA (rolling around on floor) HAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!! (pause for breath) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(gasp) Thanks, (wheeze) I needed that. (pant) This thread should be archived, it's so hilarious. :p

All you have are insults. Please keep this a realativly cognative debate.

(Even though I personaly don't give a crap)
Ahh, so a "cognative debate" would be one in which I would post a rude and incorrect generalization about another poster, followed immediately by my insisting that I don't really care?

I invoke the Montoya principle upon your use of "cognitive debate."

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (pause for breath) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (hoarse) HAHAHAHAHAHA (rolling around on floor) HAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!! (pause for breath) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(gasp) Thanks, (wheeze) I needed that. (pant) This thread should be archived, it's so hilarious. :p

Ditto. Oh hold on, I'll make a thread myself in the same vein, TROLL, TROLL, TROLL, FLAME, TROLL.......

U.N. abassador ship, what eduction have you actually had? All your arguements have been spectacularly ripped apart and shat on by everyone on this thread, and all you can do in response is spout a completely unbacked up statement without even a reason for your view. I can already guess your response to this; how about: "That's a (Liberal) lie", "No", "You're wrong"? Take your pick.

The problem isn't with the schools. The problem is with a youth culture that is telling kids that learning is a chore.

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.
:upyours: youre an IDIOT!!! poor people cant pay for privat schooling! And public schools are plenty affective and sould get more money!:upyours:

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/DoNotFeedTroll.pngLearn from three billy goats gruff...

*CanuckHeaven passes Pythogria a barf bag.

Thank you.

Not in your system. In your proposed system it takes a lot of $ to get into a good private school. Also, when the US already spends 3 times the amount of the next 15 countries combined, what makes you think they need to spend more. Your ideas seem like the typical elitist concept of letting the poor fight your wars while you drink Brandy.
Let me attack your main points here, Im not an elitist and I dont like Brandy. btw we need to spend more to have a strong military.

U.N. abassador ship, what eduction have you actually had? All your arguements have been spectacularly ripped apart and shat on by everyone on this thread, and all you can do in response is spout a completely unbacked up statement without even a reason for your view. I can already guess your response to this; how about: "That's a (Liberal) lie", "No", "You're wrong"? Take your pick.
I have gotten an excellent private education and you no what? NONE of my arguments have been ripped apart, all they have done is repeat liberal talking points.

No Im not, and Im not joking, think about it. Private schools are always better funded and make better students.
Yeah, but only like the top 5% of the population can afford it. GREAT idea...:rolleyes:

:upyours: youre an IDIOT!!! poor people cant pay for privat schooling! And public schools are plenty affective and sould get more money!:upyours:
The arent effective and they need less money.

I have gotten an excellent private education and you no what? NONE of my arguments have been ripped apart, all they have done is repeat liberal talking points.
It's "you know what?"

Let me attack your main points here, Im not an elitist and I dont like Brandy.

Wow. I'm floored. You really took his argument to pieces and showed your own to be the correct one. Never have I seen such debating skills in action. I bow to you, sir.

I have gotten an excellent private education and you no what? NONE of my arguments have been ripped apart, all they have done is repeat liberal talking points.

You haven't made a single real argument, all you offer is blind assertion. Make a proper argument and I guarantee that it will be torn apart in minutes.

Wow. I'm floored. You really took his argument to pieces and showed your own to be the correct one. Never have I seen such debating skills in action. I bow to you, sir.
thank you

I have gotten an excellent private education and you no what? NONE of my arguments have been ripped apart, all they have done is repeat liberal talking points.

An excellent private education? You thought that China bombed pearl harbour (and don't come up with that bull about thinking of something different at the time - it just shows you don't think about what you're saying), and that the more hours a person works the more prominent they become.
Your arguements have been ripped apart because you never back up anything you say or provide proof; you even did it just now - you say you have had an excellent private education, but you haven't even said what you've been educated in or what you've learnt. What makes your private education excellent?

Ahh, so a "cognative debate" would be one in which I would post a rude and incorrect generalization about another poster, followed immediately by my insisting that I don't really care?

I invoke the Montoya principle upon your use of "cognitive debate."

He had to use the dictionary on that one.

You haven't made a single real argument, all you offer is blind assertion. Make a proper argument and I guarantee that it will be torn apart in minutes.
I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

thank you

That was sarcasm...

I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

Please. The only reason they're better at all is because they get more funding than public schools. If public schools got more funding, then they would be better than the private ones.

I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

Private education only is what happened before the 18th century, you're basically going backwards. It means only the rich get education, that is not fair.Period.

Maybe public schools could be better funded if less was spent on the military...

I have gotten an excellent private education and you no what? NONE of my arguments have been ripped apart, all they have done is repeat liberal talking points.

Evidently not in grammar, vocabulary and elementary spelling.

Good lord, even I find myself both at odds and laughing with the principal assertion of this thread, the very same me who would replace public healthcare beyond emergency care. Private schooling would, if implemented universally, create a vast gulf in educative standards and teachers between the more expensive, and less expensive schools, however you contend it would lead to equality. Testament to the private sector indeed.

I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

The public education system works with today's society. Most Middle class people cannot aford at least $10,000 a year. Private schools do generaly provide a better education, but as I stated before can be too expensive for some people.

I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

So, there are only two ways you can make this argument logically consistent:

1. Private schools for the poor will be as good as private schools for the rich.

This is obviously false, they can't afford to fund the school so well and so a public school would be better for them.

or

2. Only the rich should be educated.

This is plain stupid, in a modern economy we need a well educated workforce.

Your argument has been well and truly refuted, as promised.

Private schools do generaly provide a better education, but as I stated before can be too expensive for some people.
Agian, how does this affect me? why should I care

snip

Hole in one!

Agian, how does this affect me? why should I care

Because without a well educated workforce your economy will collapse and your money will be valueless in the inevitable depression.

Agian, how does this affect me? why should I care

This proves you are selfish. What do you think it would be like to be in their position? What makes so much more deserving of living standards than any other human being?

Evidently not in grammar, vocabulary and elementary spelling.

Good lord, even I find myself both at odds and laughing with the principal assertion of this thread, the very same me who would replace public healthcare beyond emergency care. Private schooling would, if implemented universally, create a vast gulf in educative standards and teachers between the more expensive, and less expensive schools, however you contend it would lead to equality. Testament to the private sector indeed.
Look, with the private sector you get inequality. It doesnt mean the free market isnt the best system, ineuality isnt always bad.

Agian, how does this affect me? why should I care

So essentially, working ont he precedent you set above;

- public education should be abolished since it would not affect you, nor would the lower standards in cheaper private schools.

We should therefore take you seriously why?

ineuality isnt always bad.

So when is inequality not bad?

I have, the agrument that private schools are better run, better funded, have test scores, and offer better chances for a better higher education. It stands to reason that one would want to increase the number of private schools given the results they produce.

This has yet to be refuted in a logical way. People fear because it goes against the society norms of public education and any opposition to this creates an automatic knee jerk response of "no your hurting the kids" when in fact its the opposite.

Guess why they're better funded? Because the rich parents of all the rich kids who go to them give them large sums of money.

What about the kids who don't have the extreme luck to be born into a rich family? Well, guess what, they can't go to private schools. I guess they'll just have to make do without all those educational opportunities that the rich kids have. Which means they'll probably be poor. Forever. And so will their children, because they won't be able to go to the fancy private schools either. And neither will their children.

Also, the public schools in my town were far better than the private one. The private one was a hotbed of drugs and gang-related activity, at least compared with the public schools.

I hate to be a nazi about this sort of thing, but since the topic is education, I think it's fair to say that your excellent private school obviously didn't educate you about economics, history or grammar.

Most capitalists understand that for the most talented and brightest people to rise, you have to give everybody as equal an opportunity as possible to show their stuff.

Look, with the private sector you get inequality. It doesnt mean the free market isnt the best system, ineuality isnt always bad.

Thankyou for the lesson in elementary economics, I was totally ignorant of such matters. However, why, given the necessity for education in the meritocracy you laud, is inequality in education acceptable?

Furthermore how is an admission that inequality in education is deplorable an admission to my being anti-free market?

Agian, how does this affect me? why should I care

Because if vast numbers of people were uneducated then *poof!* there goes most of the workforce, and incidentally, practically the entirety of the comforts and luxuries you enjoy because of them.

Because if vast numbers of people were uneducated then *poof!* there goes most of the workforce, and incidentally, practically the entirety of the comforts and luxuries you enjoy because of them.
If you want to be educated, pay for it like everyone else, its not a right.

What I would advocate is a move towards the liberalization of the school system. Many of the problems of our public school system can be traced to a lack of incentive to improve. Most of quality control is filtered through the political process, rather than teachers being directly accountable to the parent for results. If the parent was allowed to transfer a portion of their funds away with a child to another school (even another public or charter school), or (even better) issue a scholarship to be used at the private or public school of the choice of the parent. If this were the case, I might take more seriously the claims of teachers that they do not have the funds or resources to teach their children if parents, instead on leaving a district when they have the ability to, would complain to their legislatures. But the parents should be the first line of defense against bad education, not the last.

Thankyou for the lesson in elementary economics, I was totally ignorant of such matters. However, why, given the necessity for education in the meritocracy you laud, is inequality in education acceptable?

Furthermore how is an admission that inequality in education is deplorable an admission to my being anti-free market?
inequality in education is acceptable, its a by product of the great free market.

If you want to be educated, pay for it like everyone else, its not a right.

We've already established that many people can't afford a decent standard of education and that it's in your interests for them to get one. You've been proved utterly wrong.

What I would advocate is a move towards the liberalization of the school system. Many of the problems of our public school system can be traced to a lack of incentive to improve. Most of quality control is filtered through the political process, rather than teachers being directly accountable to the parent for results. If the parent was allowed to transfer a portion of their funds away with a child to another school (even another public or charter school), or (even better) issue a scholarship to be used at the private or public school of the choice of the parent. If this were the case, I might take more seriously the claims of teachers that they do not have the funds or resources to teach their children if parents, instead on leaving a district when they have the ability to, would complain to their legislatures. But the parents should be the first line of defense against bad education, not the last.
well put

If you want to be educated, pay for it like everyone else, its not a right.

Neither is getting your trash collected or having your road plowed or your vote counted or your wars fought. Perhaps we should privatize those things as well.

Neither is getting your trash collected or having your road plowed or your vote counted or your wars fought. Perhaps we should privatize those things as well.

Wait... you don't pay to get your trash collected?

Wait... you don't pay to get your trash collected?

My local taxes do, but not directly.

If you want to be educated, pay for it like everyone else, its not a right.

Is that so eh?

Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

I strongly suggest you read through a few rights before making assumpotions about what they are and aren't. There's a few others in there you might find interesting too.

Neither is getting your trash collected or having your road plowed or your vote counted or your wars fought. Perhaps we should privatize those things as well.

Actually I'm pretty sure the voting thing is a right.

inequality in education is acceptable, its a by product of the great free market.

Why do some humans deserve a better education than others? That's not acceptable.

What I would advocate is a move towards the liberalization of the school system. Many of the problems of our public school system can be traced to a lack of incentive to improve. Most of quality control is filtered through the political process, rather than teachers being directly accountable to the parent for results. If the parent was allowed to transfer a portion of their funds away with a child to another school (even another public or charter school), or (even better) issue a scholarship to be used at the private or public school of the choice of the parent. If this were the case, I might take more seriously the claims of teachers that they do not have the funds or resources to teach their children if parents, instead on leaving a district when they have the ability to, would complain to their legislatures. But the parents should be the first line of defense against bad education, not the last.

Of course this requires the parents to understand what is being taught, by the time I was fifteen my mother couldn't really keep up with the french and german I was learning (and she'd learnt both when she was at school). How do you expect a parent with little or no knowledge on a subject to judge the quality of teaching? Also consider areas such as the Bible Belt where parents may flock away from schools which offer a decent explanation of evolution.

inequality in education is acceptable, its a by product of the great free market.

Good lord. Beyond citing the "great free market" with an unfounded reference, which you ought to explain, why is inequality in education acceptable?

Is that so eh?


http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

I strongly suggest you read through a few rights before making assumpotions about what they are and aren't. There's a few others in there you might find interesting too.

Nicely done. *bows* :)

Why do some humans deserve a better education than others? That's not acceptable.

Oh no. Of course its acceptable, Daddy's money makes everything alright.

My local taxes do, but not directly.
Huh. Interesting.

Bin taxes here. A yearly fee on top of a small collection fee for every time you leave it out to be picked up. Kinda an incentive to increase recycling by putting less in regular bins and more into the green ones.

Althought you can still drop it off to the dump yourself and not have to pay the fees if you want. :rolleyes:

Whats wrong with state schools?

Nicely done. *bows* :)

Why thank you :) I thought it was rather good myself, but... you know - didn't wanna say it, since that woulda just made me sound big-headed lol.

Whats wrong with state schools?

I do actually concur that stae education is inherently and immensely flawed, however reform, and a return to grammar schools is preferable to purely private education.

Why thank you :) I thought it was rather good myself, but... you know - didn't wanna say it, since that woulda just made me sound big-headed lol.

Anyone who posts something that strong has the automatic right to be big headed.
Says so in article 31 :D

You know, I'm going to play a free market capitalist here for a second when I say this:

A foot race isn't any good if all the runners don't start at the same place.

Anyone who posts something that strong has the automatic right to be big headed.
Says so in article 31 :D

Hehe, in which case (in reference to my previous post) UNA: Zing bizzatch!

I do actually concur that stae education is inherently and immensely flawed, however reform, and a return to grammar schools is preferable to purely private education.

I went to State School's (in Boston, England) and there isn't a problem

Of course this requires the parents to understand what is being taught, by the time I was fifteen my mother couldn't really keep up with the french and german I was learning (and she'd learnt both when she was at school). How do you expect a parent with little or no knowledge on a subject to judge the quality of teaching?

That's what standardized tests are for (some of which are privately administered). Also experience others have with the school. In any case this is still a problem with our current schools anyway.

Also consider areas such as the Bible Belt where parents may flock away from schools which offer a decent explanation of evolution.

Possibly, but this happens anyway if the parent is determined enough, and in my opinion an education that teaches creationism, while a detraction in some respects, does not completely undermine one's educational experience.

why is inequality in education acceptable?

Inequality in education is inevitable. There is no system that has ever educated people equally. The ones that tried, ended up pleasing the lowest common denominator, and society benefits by having everyone educated to the best of their respective abilities and funds, whether the result is inequality or not. We as a society can subsidize education and open options up to as many parents as possible, but money will always buy good education, except in repressive regimes.

I went to State School's (in Boston, England) and there isn't a problem

To mundane and mediocre, too focused on results, no emphasis upon academia, lower class of pupil and teacher. I do attend a Grammar school, however, so my opinions may well be biased.....

i had a lady yell at me at work once, and told me that i should be put into a catholic school because public schools weren't cutting it. my school is like, top in the state and we're all pretty intelligent. we dont need fewer public schools, we need more.

The problem with public schools is the lack of consistancy. Some are great, and some are insults to education.

I went to a great public school. 15% of my class was in the top half of one percent nationwide in standardized testing well before no child left behind made such testing mandatory.

Standards were tough, and you were expected to meet them. If you couldn't read, or do basic math, you didn't pass. Plain and simple.

I had a lot of great teachers, who were passonate about they taught, and were thrilled if you had a well reasoned argument that went against what thier position was. Or if you were able to come up with a solution to a problem on your own that was different from the method that they taught.

i also had some very bad teachers. Teachers who didn't want students, but wanted parrots. Repeat what I say, and nothing else. Challenging these teachers was a quick trip to the office. I ended up there alot.

unfortunatly in the the education system in this country seems to be packed with the latter rather than the former.

I think we can assume from The U.N. abassadorship's lack of response that he now realises that banning public schooling is ridiculously unfair on less well off people and shouldn't be done. Mosseica even pointed out it was a breach of human rights.
If only U.N. abassadorship could either admit that he has either learnt from this or come up with a decent arguement against it, then I might have some great respect for him.

To mundane and mediocre, too focused on results, no emphasis upon academia, lower class of pupil and teacher. I do attend a Grammar school, however, so my opinions may well be biased.....
As a guy that went to a secondary modern (Supposedly the worst tyoe of school.) and a grammer school (a levels)I think theres a not that big a diffrence. Odviously soke kids are less bright at state schools, mainly becuase whats supposedly the best 30% has been creamed off. The teachers are still very good, the ebst teacher I ever had was at Wharefdale.

There is a big emphsis here on Achdemia, well for the top lot like myself there was not much diffrence. less homework, but thsat was about it. For the record my results stand at 6 A*s, 2 As, a B and a D.(French, I had to pick it, no choice.) Not a bad return going to one of the worst schools in the coutnry.

Grammer schools pupils arn't that good actually. Many are tutored big time to get past there 11+, some people have education from 7 or 8 so they can pass the test at 11.

Seriously ban them. They are ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money. That money should be spent on the military or in Americans pockets, your thoughts.

Yeah, cos getting rid of schools would mean the average american could count whats in his pocket?

Hot diggity, lets all be dumb crackers and join the military, i'm coming home in a body-bag. YEEHAW!

beneath contempt.

Yeah, cos getting rid of schools would mean the average american could count whats in his pocket?

Hot diggity, lets all be dumb crackers and join the military, i'm coming home in a body-bag. YEEHAW!

beneath contempt.

Ah you found it then. Almost amusing isn't it? But then at the same time it almost makes me wanna cry, so...

Ah you found it then. Almost amusing isn't it? But then at the same time it almost makes me wanna cry, so...

Am wondering what on earth would make anyone think IGNORANCE is a good idea...

Am wondering what on earth would make anyone think IGNORANCE is a good idea...

Conservatism :D

Conservatism :D

Yeah, i didn't think straight when asking that one, did i?

As a guy that went to a secondary modern (Supposedly the worst tyoe of school.) and a grammer school (a levels)I think theres a not that big a diffrence. Odviously soke kids are less bright at state schools, mainly becuase whats supposedly the best 30% has been creamed off. The teachers are still very good, the ebst teacher I ever had was at Wharefdale.

There is a big emphsis here on Achdemia, well for the top lot like myself there was not much diffrence. less homework, but thsat was about it. For the record my results stand at 6 A*s, 2 As, a B and a D.(French, I had to pick it, no choice.) Not a bad return going to one of the worst schools in the coutnry.

Grammer schools pupils arn't that good actually. Many are tutored big time to get past there 11+, some people have education from 7 or 8 so they can pass the test at 11.

Personally, I find that the sole difference in terms of personality in a grammar school is the arrogance of the pupils (me encorporated in that). However, I daresay you are a remarkably rare exception to a rule that is, statistics prove, remarkably pervasive.

Please stop feeding the troll!

Thank you!

What I find funny is that UN Ambassadorship has provoked quite a reaction out of all of you and you have replied. That's what he wanted, no person in their right mind really believes what he has said.

What I find funny is that UN Ambassadorship has provoked quite a reaction out of all of you and you have replied. That's what he wanted, no person in their right mind really believes what he has said.

What I find funny is that you're about the 12th person to point that out as if you're enlightening us to some great secret. What I also find funny is that we've all stated we knew he was just trolling, but we were responding anyway.

Conservatism :D
Actually there are many intelligent conservatives out there. You can't consider someone who has different beliefs than you an idiot, that makes you the ignorant one. The majority of conservatives and liberals base their opinions on what they logically see as the right way to do it. "Conservative" does not necessarily equal "Stupid, just as "Liberal" does not necessarily equal "Intelligent". There are both intelligent and stupid people on each side, along with people in between those levels. So to call someone ignorant and unenlightened for not having the same viewpoint as you is hypocritical, because that in itself is ignorant.

What I find funny is that you're about the 12th person to point that out as if you're enlightening us to some great secret. What I also find funny is that we've all stated we knew he was just trolling, but we were responding anyway.

(Walks away ashamed)

"Jerk!"

(Sobs)


PS: Just kidding.

Actually there are many intelligent conservatives out there. You can't consider someone who has different beliefs than you an idiot, that makes you the ignorant one. The majority of conservatives and liberals base their opinions on what they logically see as the right way to do it. "Conservative" does not necessarily equal "Stupid, just as "Liberal" does not necessarily equal "Intelligent". There are both intelligent and stupid people on each side, along with people in between those levels. So to call someone ignorant and unenlightened for not having the same viewpoint as you is hypocritical, because that in itself is ignorant.

Yowch. Please note the ':D' at the end of my post - meant to convey the fact that I was in fact joking. Seriously - if I wanted to find examples/reasons for his ignorance I could dig up some much better ones than his apparent political position.

Yowch. Please note the ':D' at the end of my post - meant to convey the fact that I was in fact joking. Seriously - if I wanted to find examples/reasons for his ignorance I could dig up some much better ones than his apparent political position.
I know, I'm just using it to make a point.

(Thinks to himself)
Man, I'm really saying a lot of stupid crap these days.

(Walks away ashamed)

"Jerk!"

(Sobs)


PS: Just kidding.

Well I am a jerk.

What's wrong with privatizing the education system? The main problem with the current system is lack of competition, which leads to stagnation and low academic standards. If schools are privatized, then there will be more of an incentive for schools to become better, teach more, hire better teachers, etc., which will in turn lead to a more educated populace.