Some people are born cunts. Ghengis Khan, hitler etc. not very nice people.
BUT
I believe that man is shaped by his environment. Therefore, we can change tomorrows world for the better.
And I left a party because I’m too drunk, or they’re too drunk, to get it across.
July 5, 2009 at 10:38 pm |
Ghengis Kahn really wasnt a ban guy…. hes defo not a hitler… ha
July 6, 2009 at 12:43 am |
Ghengis salted the earth of the villages he burned so that no crops would ever grow there again. There’s also some statistic floating around about the size of his ‘legacy’-he was a bit of an asshole
July 6, 2009 at 2:52 am |
Im bored so im gona make something of this….
Put it in perspective… Mr. Kahn wasnt exactly a 20th century, well educated vegetarien who enjoyed expencive wines and gased Jews!!!!!…. he was a 13th century warlord who laid the foundations for many of the asian countries and united numerous waring tribes.. granted he was violent.. but the times and place he lived in were violent also… i would have to say putting Genghis Kahn in the same catagory as Hitler would warrent the inclusion of other people you may be familiar with … Alexander the Great for must be a cunt too then.. how about Ceaser, yea he’s a cunt too… hmmm.. who else? Cunobelin? yea lets call him a Cunt cus he had wars and enemies too… ooo were getting close to home now… The High Kings of Ireland did a bit of that…they had wars and messed with livestock in order to keep the gaf together…therefore….they are Cunts too!!! Right?
You might want to have a look at Mongolian currency, large Mongolian statues in the centre of their Capitol, parhaps ask a Mongolian if he is proud of the person who created and symbolises his country…… and then tell them that Genghis Kahn was a Cunt…
its like a Mongolian coming up to us and sayin that Micheal Collins was a Cunt, Padraig Pearse….cunt… Daniel O’Connell….cunt!… St. Patrick was a god loving Cunt!..
..go up to a German or Austrian and tell them that Hitler was a cunt… and im pretty sure they would agree with you. … because Hitler was a cunt
If you are secretly an Iranian and have an 800 year chip on your shoulder then fair enough, call him a cunt…
July 6, 2009 at 2:54 am |
Pol Pot….. he’s a fucking Cunt.
July 6, 2009 at 12:23 pm |
Well, for a start your assertion that Hitler came from a less violent time is down right ludicrous if not a tad arrogant. In terms of efficiently massacring millions, the last 200 years really have been a ‘golden era’, even prior to Hitlers death factories.
Take for instance the first world war, which an impressionable young Hitler served in. It was so drenched and sodden in young mens blood that they called it the war to end all wars, as we now know-it didn’t. A few years later the Allies, yes the allies, would drop THE bomb-twice. And that, only after the burning of Tokyo. Causing untold suffering.
And yes, you’re right, Ghengis united large chunks of the world into a single unified empire. A bit like the way Hitler united Poland and Germany, which basically accounts for most of central Europe. It’s much of a muchness really, both engaged in ethnic cleansing and the willful oppression of other cultures.
Now, it’s without question that Hitler was by far the more efficient monster. But is it not also fair to say that, had Hitler won overall as Ghengis did, we would have a very different opinion of him? Being raised on history books written by the Reich as opposed to the Allies? Being completely, helplessly, indoctrinated from birth. As we currently are, to focus on what Hitler did in Europe as opposed to what the Allies did in Asia.
Ceaser. I know that you are familiar with at least one of the Romantic languages. The derivatives of Latin, corrupted and twisted over long dead generations, into the modern French, Italian or Spanish. The question I put to you simply is; what language did the people in these places speak before Rome’s conquest?
It simply is not enough to say that there was nothing there. Because we know that there was something there. But it was all washed away, deliberately destroyed, cleansed if you will.
Alexander is an interesting one. He was a remarkably charismatic and intelligent politician, but, was probably harder on his men than his enemies, whose culture and population remained largely intact. He also killed his own father to marry his mother, which is minus points.
The High Kings, plural, did not exist. There were five kingdoms with a single, elected, High King whose role it was to adjudicate between disputes and unite the island when faced by a common enemy.
They did fight, viciously, over land and cattle but I think you’ve picked the wrong bit. For they never set out to destroy one another, only to accumulate wealth. In fact, the provisions of both having a High King and a tradition of hostaging prevented all out war for extended periods of time.
However, they did take slaves from across the water. The famous one was a shepherd boy called Patrick. Slavery, though equally deplorable, is not ethnic cleansing.
But we’re going off the point here. The point being that Ghengis was a bastard, that the “etc.” was there to avoid this debate altogether and that history favors those who win. Because it’s them who write it.
Now, moving on from the first sentence of a post which is dwarfed by the comments section. My overall point was that our society is creating monsters through a process of social, educational and workplace exclusion. I do no expect a utopian society, some people are just naturally cunts. But I do feel that the weakest in ours are being forced into a violent destructive life, that could otherwise be avoided, by environmental factors which we, the elite, have the ability to control.
July 6, 2009 at 5:35 pm |
First of all.
High Kings….PLURAL.. surely the HIGH part of the title would stop anyone from thinking there was more than one high king at any one time.. of course i knew there wasnt but you would have to be equally retarded to think that there was only ever one high king for the hundreds of years that Celtic traditions survived… thus The High Kingsssssssss..
and on the topic of the title High King…. did you ever stop to think what “Kahn” means?
And the Irish High Kings didnt cleanse the country we are agreed on that, and i never suggested they did…that was my whole point(If Hitler=Genghis, and for me Genghis=Irish High King, then Hitler who did commit ethnic cleansing is essentially being compared to any world leader who faought wars, like that of the High Kings)., and anyway if they did there wouldnt have been anyone for them to rule… also be careful what you would consider cleansing… salting crops and having a war with a country for their territory and the right to rule over them is not cleansing… killing them off systematically so that no trace of them survives, thats cleansing. just like Genghis Kahn didnt cleanse those he fought after defeating them… he assimilated their countries and territories, granted using harsh methods in order to get the point across if he had to, and moved on…
“both engaged in ethnic cleansing and the willful oppression of other cultures. ” (yes i know im quoting you, but sure thats half the fun)
This quote is simply not true.
and really i dont see why this makes Genghis Kahn a cunt.*
Before the Romans people spoke their local languages…and im pretty sure during the roman reign most people still spoke their local languages…just like after the Romans… when they still spoke their local languages.. Latin had an influence, thats why there are similarities between spanish french and italian.. but the vernacular still remained and thats why we actualy have Spanish French and Itialian, English, German and all those other languages from the places the romans went.
but i still dont see why this makes Genghis Kahn a cunt.*
I Never said Hitler came from a less violent time, i said he was more educated. Please read over that part again and point out the arrogant section you are refering to.
But i still dont see why that makes Genghis Kahn a cunt.*
If Hitler had won, a lot of the things he did would have been suppressed and hidden, and we would have been taught to believe he was a true hero. Very true. Genghis Kahn did win, but Genghis Kahn didnt hide anything, and Mongolian history isnt changed in any way to convince anyone that he was super peaceful and gracious… everybody knows Genghis was a violent warlord in a violent time who united his world under an iron fist… nobody is denying that.. Hitler kept the Holocaust a secret… and thats a big difference.
and im still wondering how Genghis Kahn is a Cunt. *
And my comment was only about the first line… that of you calling Genghis Kahn a cunt… so i think these comments are very much on topic.
My point is that some historical figues like Genghis Kahn, the leaders of the Roman Empire, Ottoman empire, Persian Empire etc etc all lived in a time where the only way to achieve peace and unity in their homes was through Military dominance. And what resulted most of the time was just that, peace, security and prosperity.(just like how the High King in Ireland had a military dominance that discouraged unrest) Greed of course did exist and while some empires learnt to be happy with what they have and stop expanding (Great wall of China)…others pushed too far and lost control and granted this was down to individual leaders who were greedy.. and the cycle starts again. But that was the time they lived in and you have to accept that difference!
Democratic and political agreements between contries did of course exist in various forms back then, but with the increasingly complex relations between more powerful and equally complex forms of government coupled with improvements in technology and modern philosophy, not to mention trade, capitolism and the profit one could gain from peace (The Renaissance). War was more often avoided and politics came to the fore. And so in light of the World War and the Franco-Prussian war before it.. a more politically minded and a more aware public (thanks to modern media) would have definitely seen the horrors/destruction/pointlesnes/disadvantages of modern warfare… a type of war which was far beyond anything ever experienced before.. and definitelty eons from anything Genghis Kahn could ever fathom riding horse back with a sword in hand. But as you say, Hitler, who was in the First World War.. and who saw it with his own eyes… he was willing to enter his country into this sort of war.. in full knowledge that England France and Russia didnt want to have to go through with it again.. he brought Europe into an even more modern war… which had no concern for the public, had no rules, no arrangements or face offs unlike warfare in the 13th century… we wont even go into the Holocaust… but to compare that sort of behaviour to Genghis Kahn is in my book completely inaccurate and unfair. Like i said if you really just dont like Genghis Kahn and you want to call him a Cunt thats fine… but to draw comparisons and consider him in the same catagory of Hitler is just wrong i think.
I dont really have anyhting to say about the rest of your post.. its more of an observation that anything..
…im just saying take a second to consider what your saying before you group Genghis in with Hitler ..
*A cunt in the same Cunt catagory of that as Hitler, who most definitely tops my Cunt-o-metre. ..
July 6, 2009 at 6:34 pm |
No, I’m sorry, I just don’t buy into this cunt-o-meter bullshit. If I steal an apple, and you steal a diamond, we’re both still thieves regardless of the worth of the item stolen.
Salting earth starves the local populace, it was the most effective form of social destruction at the time. The fact that you have persistently referred to him as a Warlord is actually enough for me to rest my entire case. Warlords, such as the Bush dynasty, are not nice people. Generally speaking, they’re a pack of war mongering cunts.
July 6, 2009 at 7:18 pm |
Have a look at the bigger picture.