History repeats itself

Adjust content blockingContent Blocking

creepybaby Rank: #108

Channel: politics

next random

Comment

History repeats itself. .. Funniest part? Turns out those concrete blocks are more harmful than helpful in case another truck of peace is steered towards a Christmas market of your choice

+2135

Views: 36876 Submitted: 12/06/2017

Block User's Content

Block Channel Content

Related Top Content:

Sounds like child abuse

3574

Cards Against Common Sense

2752

How to end up with a Cat

lively nippy horrible Lapwing

2490

Sexual harassment

2442

Pisug Ytuctof Tochimugl

2428

Meanwhile in South Africa...

2408

Sambyoch Edinilt Umercalyod

Hide Comments

Add Comment Refresh (239)

First 2 3 4 5 Last Next

[ 239 comments ]

Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest

Live Updates: On

Options

asd

#2 - platinumaltaria

-6

has deleted their comment [-]

#4 to #2 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+517

(12/06/2017)[-]

>Defending yourself against terrorism is wrong

Yeah no, you are just saying that.

The post implies its unsafe times, theres a reason the medieval period had walls and every day defences. Times were unsafe. A castle to show mightyness does nothing , you need stuff on the streets.

People are however complaining about the fact that Europe has allowed these unceartain times to happend by importing millions of 3rd worlders from 'different' cultural and ethnical areas.

But i guess that aint nothing wrong, immigration tottally had nothing to do with this right? Its just those damn right wingers being retarded about stuff, isnt that right?

#7 to #4 - blatherskite#100 on commentsRank#100

Reply+189

(12/06/2017)[-]

A Swede is telling off platinum on national affairs...

What retarded thing did he say this time?

#29 to #7 - bloggershe

Reply+131

(12/06/2017)[-]

This time?
Theres a time platinum aint retarded?

#111 to #29 - ronaldkun

Reply+67

(12/06/2017)[-]

Well, it happens on occasion.
Plat is a bit different from the average retard, you have to take him on a case-by-case basis sometimes because sometimes he actually says something very sensible and true.

Of course, when plat goes full retard, he really goes full retard. That tends to be about 80+% of the time.

#121 to #111 - amuzen#291 on commentsRank#291

Reply+11

(12/06/2017)[-]

I had a theory that Plat is actually very right wing and just says retarded **** that's just a step away from full out **** faced trolling so people can easily refute it. Although, I don't think I've seen her delete posts for being to negatively received before so that might destroy my theory.

#140 to #121 - vvardenfell

Reply+35

(12/06/2017)[-]

"her"
Hahahaha, **** no.

#159 to #121 - willgum

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

She does it a lot, though it's normally after like 5 hours of arguing.

#184 to #159 - homestuckxplain

Reply+2

(12/07/2017)[-]

"she"

No, my son.

No.

#194 to #184 - willgum

Reply+5

(12/07/2017)[-]

"if person x requests I refer to them with whatever pronoun they prefer, I'll do it because I am nice."
-me, several times throughout my time on this site. I'm not going back on my word just
because you don't like someone

#208 to #111 - checkemninja

Reply+1

(12/07/2017)[-]

There are multiple plats

#158 to #29 - willgum

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

actually yes, sometimes he makes a good point, it's rare but it happens.

#35 to #7 - nagafever#134 on commentsRank#134

Reply+10

(12/06/2017)[-]

it*

#34 to #7 - islamicnatzie

Reply-95

(12/06/2017)[-]

KILL YOURSELF YOU FILTHY BRITFAG!!@

HHHHHNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG!!!

#44 to #34 - ihatepcpoleesh

Reply+82

(12/06/2017)[-]

#70 to #34 - addembomb

Reply+49

(12/06/2017)[-]

Here we go again

#45 to #34 - mrwambo

Reply+32

(12/06/2017)[-]

DELETE THIS!

#97 to #34 - anon id: e4e34c31

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

Go outside and get enriched

#72 to #34 - thalassinus

Reply+3

(12/06/2017)[-]

**thalassinus used "*roll picture*"**
**thalassinus rolled image** MEN VAD I HELVETE GÖR DU POJKJÄVEL

#142 to #34 - islamicnatzie

has deleted their comment [-]

#6 to #4 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+34

(12/06/2017)[-]

Plus, the reasons walls in everyday cities became a thing was because lawless bands had the size and power to attack and loot towns and villages without them.

A wall would only be used in a couple of wars in its entire life, but during the entire life of it , they kept bigger bandit raids away.
Militarised forts from the end of the 15th century are a bit of a different story, since they did have it in mind to stop cannons and invaders.

Before that a castle manned with just a few men could hold armies away for ages

#12 to #6 - dasgaybro

Reply+9

(12/06/2017)[-]

*roll picture*

The problem here is not the act of defending yourself - but the idea of who you need to defend yourself against, and what places need to be defended.

You need to fortify your Christmas markets because a religious minority in your own country is attacking it? Sounds like a place I want to live, yeah!

#164 to #6 - anon id: 50f181cb

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

maybe in your country, we were defending against the ******** for hundreds of years

#165 to #164 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+4

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yeah and you started slacking off and now we are all drowning.

Thanks for your ever going vigilance.

#166 to #165 - anon id: 50f181cb

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

Slacking when? We put up the fence.

#168 to #166 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yeah those fences need some work

#169 to #168 - anon id: 50f181cb

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

They are getting work but I don't think those are ours.

#170 to #169 - anon id: 50f181cb

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

This was the initial on the crowded places.

#237 to #168 - lejoan

Reply0

(12/08/2017)[-]

World war z remastered.

#69 to #6 - ikarustwo

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

Castle had to have only few people in. Otherwise it would eat trough it's resources too fast. Hence the term "lay siege". Since opposing force very often literally layed around until one or the other ran out of resources.

#146 to #4 - carlonord#152 on commentsRank#152

Reply+15

(12/06/2017)[-]

#54 to #4 - caesarslegion

Reply+14

(12/06/2017)[-]

PlatinumUltra is being a retarded tranny again.

Big surprise

#143 to #4 - anon id: b822ad6a

Reply+7

(12/06/2017)[-]

Rare case in which a liberal censors himself

#106 to #4 - sabcy

Reply+3

(12/06/2017)[-]

I have nothing to add, please thumb me down.

#90 to #4 - jdizzleoffthehizzl#359 on commentsRank#359

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

What did he say?

#141 to #90 - treefox

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

It*

#51 to #4 - anon id: 8bb41d67

Reply-11

(12/06/2017)[-]

To be fair, Medieval European cities also had barely any migration restrictions, but yeah lets just leave that out and cherry pick what we like right?

#88 to #51 - anon id: 3ece15aa

Reply+14

(12/06/2017)[-]

What a retarded thing to say. You may as well have just typed "I have nothing to contribute, please thumb me down."

#163 to #51 - slias

Reply+6

(12/06/2017)[-]

They had fantastic migration restrictions. Peasants weren't allowed to leave whatever ******** they lived in. Serfdom was practically slavery.

#157 to #51 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+4

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yeah.

Which is why bandits and criminals from ****** areas in the world migrated into well to do towns which sparked a need for walls and guard posts to check and tax travelers.

#8 to #4 - anon id: fdca0093

Reply-19

(12/06/2017)[-]

its not even as big of an issue as it is made to appear on here.

#192 to #8 - anon id: 717a0da9

Reply+1

(12/07/2017)[-]

There's a bunch of foreign *****. A friend who visited France and Italy was expecting blue-eyed, fair-skinned people buy was surprised how many brown people there were

#5 to #2 - redbluetundra

Reply+47

(12/06/2017)[-]

It's not the defenses, it's that in modern Europe we shouldn't need to put up defenses, but we must...because of ******* terrible.....TERRIBLE decisions from current leadership.

#3 to #2 - anon id: 57992e11

Reply+6

(12/06/2017)[-]

I think dynamite was the invention that made walls obsolete.

#33 to #3 - KillinTime#250 on commentsRank#250

Reply+9

(12/06/2017)[-]

This is a great reference that nobody gets.

#64 to #33 - anon id: 63ef9d3a

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

Civ?

#189 to #64 - anon id: 9f442bf2

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Wasn't that Gunpowder?

#36 to #3 - islamicnatzie

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yeah but i stll have walls in my house...

#15 - samoaspider

Reply+34

(12/06/2017)[-]

I'm so glad I'm living in eastern europe not west where everything has gone to ****

#41 to #15 - syntheticdoll

Reply+83

(12/06/2017)[-]

Eastern Europe is migrant-free because it's already too ****** for any ********** to come here willingly. Also, we would just throw them to the gypsyes.

#177 to #41 - jimbobjim

Reply+3

(12/06/2017)[-]

We don't call them *********** any more, we call them Dune Coons

#30 to #15 - anon id: f9390cc0

Reply+10

(12/06/2017)[-]

Baltic stronk.

Pay no support for migrants, horde all money under bed.

STRONK!

#100 to #15 - anon id: afea2fa4

Reply+4

(12/06/2017)[-]

'im so glad im living in my **** country and not in that other country that is also becoming *****

#107 to #100 - samoaspider

Reply+9

(12/06/2017)[-]

low-end country thats improving > good country thats drastically gone to ****

#37 to #15 - islamicnatzie

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

Umm you're already **** sweetie

#53 to #37 - samoaspider

Reply+12

(12/06/2017)[-]

>independant since 1991
>low population count of 1.3million
>still slowly growing economy spite the huge oil fiasco
>most of the people don't give a **** about religion
>goverment giving the absolute minimal rates of income to foreigners, forcing them to **** off

idk, it feels pretty good walking on the streets with only white people around here and no police has to guard streets with guns, mr. Sweden

#110 to #53 - sabcy

Reply+6

(12/06/2017)[-]

Why would I go to a non pvp zone?

#215 to #53 - sanepane

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

C-could Estonian government maybe adopt Finland?

#178 to #37 - cptsweatpants

Reply+3

(12/06/2017)[-]

We sure are, but at least we still have our sense of national pride and identity. That's a win in my book. To paraphrase full metal jacket, ''This is my country, there are many better than it, but this one is mine.''

#151 to #37 - shitshitshit#40 on commentsRank#40

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

Of all the ******* people to sling ****

#25 to #15 - notahanzomain#22 on commentsRank#22

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

Blyat

#13 - orkamungus

Reply+63

(12/06/2017)[-]

Funniest part? Turns out those concrete blocks are more harmful than helpful in case another truck of peace is steered towards a Christmas market of your choice. The average, run-of-the-mill truck like the one used during the attack in Berlin last year is far too large, heavy and powerful to be stopped by those blocks. Instead it would turn them into projectiles. Now I think we can all agree that at least 200 kg of concrete coming at you with at least 100 km/h are kinda bad news.

#17 to #13 - anon id: 7659f687

Reply+35

(12/06/2017)[-]

But the truck will be damaged to much to continue on a long and killing journey. It will probably drive for about 100 meters before coming to a complete halt, while a truck ploughing through humans can go on for a few KM.

#22 to #17 - pingun#135 on commentsRank#135

Reply+8

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yeah a few hundred meters is what happend in Nicé.

In a town it wouldnt be able to travel that far, maybe in the open if a bunch of people sat on a road, but not in a town.

#145 to #17 - lotengo#101 on commentsRank#101

Reply-1

(12/06/2017)[-]

German Anti Terror Truck Concrete Blocks proven to be USELESS in Crash Test

Keep in mind that there are several larger/heavier trucks out there and this one isn't evn close to full speed

#160 to #145 - horsecrab

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

How is that useless? The truck tires and most likely steering column are destroyed. The truck isn't going much farther. The terrorist attack is over.

#161 to #160 - lotengo#101 on commentsRank#101

Reply-2

(12/06/2017)[-]

You say it isn't going much farther.

In a crowded area that might as well be a mile

#173 to #161 - horsecrab

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

Without the blocks it actually would be a mile. The blocks completely gut the frontal wheel system. That truck can no longer be steered, assuming the engine itself isn't damaged. The truck is about to come to a dead stop.

What is your solution, to remove the blocks and just let everyone get ******?

#152 to #145 - masanori

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

It would be way different hitting a wall like the one pictured. Hitting one of those blocks directly would do more to stop that truck than hitting the corners of two like it did.

#75 to #13 - springbok#11 on commentsRank#11

Reply+24

(12/06/2017)[-]

"Ze funniest part ist zat zis vill kill more people" ... who said Germans don't have a sense of humor

#76 to #75 - orkamungus

Reply+8

(12/06/2017)[-]

It's German humor, that's no laughing matter.

#101 to #13 - damianblu

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

They're reinforced and connected though. I highly doubt a truck would have an easy time plowing through that. Or even be able to at all really.

For instance here's a truck hitting a reinforced retaining wall at 60mph:

If the blocks were just sitting there I think you'd be partially right (They'd probably only move 10 feet or so) but yeah. They're definitely connected.

#112 to #101 - orkamungus

Reply+3

(12/06/2017)[-]

Not the ones I've seen here in Germany so far.

#115 to #112 - damianblu

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

I'm just talking about this picture. You can see that they're connected to the gate and connected to the wall. It's only sensible that connection would run through the whole series of blocks.

Although that is odd. Go hard or go home you know. It's not like it takes much effort to make connecting blocks.

#120 to #115 - orkamungus

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

If you refer to the video: looks like a test range to me. Here in Germany, walls like this aren't build around the markets, literally all we have are these loose conrete blocks, mostly because the interlockable ones are already quite expensive in comparison. With a sufficiently large truck, there's a good chance that those things won't stand a chance.

#136 to #120 - damianblu

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

That's cool and all but not what's in the picture in the content.

#138 to #136 - orkamungus

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

I'll admit that those blocks in the picture might actually stand a certain chance a stopping a truck, being interlocked and all. Thing being, most of the blocks around Christmas markets here in Germany look like what I posted. And those are already the larger ones.

#83 to #13 - anon id: 5c7c3554

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

not neccessarily, if theyre reinforced with steel with even a 12 inch pipe going below it, a semi would have a hard time not flattening to a pancake upon impact with that

#85 to #83 - orkamungus

Reply+7

(12/06/2017)[-]

Thing being that most of these aren't anchored in the ground. They may be interlocked with each other in some cases, and that might actually help a bit, but most of them are just loose blocks.

#20 to #13 - fatsigurd

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

We all know they're mostly there to give people a false feeling of safety.

#108 to #13 - sabcy

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

something makes me doubt you.

#123 to #108 - orkamungus

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

This is a bumper installed directly into the ground, there actually have been some cities who wanted to use those things in their security concept instead of the concrete blocks because they are far more efficient. Problem being: they're very expensive, and the government will most likely not provide any money to the communities so that the people can actually feel a bit safer.

#104 to #13 - anon id: a585b633

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Alright I'm going to need source on where you're getting this information because I'm having a hard time believing anything short of a nuke could turn those into 'projectiles'

#130 to #104 - orkamungus

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Here's a link to a study undertaken to figure out how effective those loose concrete blocks are. Quickly summarized: most of those things do hardly anything, a normal truck with 50 km/h basically just pushes them aside and drives on. What would be more effective would be properly installed poles, which can be retracted into the ground and brought up again as necessary. The problem here is, those things are very expensive, and the cities have to carry all the costs. I highly doubt that the stat will provide any money for that in any way.

#131 to #130 - orkamungus

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Forgot the link. www.mdr.de/umschau/lkw-durchbricht-an...

#31 to #13 - anon id: f9390cc0

Reply-9

(12/06/2017)[-]

Merry Christmas, Germany-muslim-dicksucker-losers!

Hope some sort of WW3 starts, so Russia, USA and Chian can **** you to death finally!

#66 to #31 - ikarustwo

Reply+10

(12/06/2017)[-]

You actually expect that modern day Germany will start such a major war that USA, Russia and China would ally together against them?

You must be joking. If not, I think you ODed on redpills.

#81 - mormagil

Reply-28

(12/06/2017)[-]

This is suggesting that the existence of castles in Europe is primarily because of Muslims. That is absolutely false.

It's true that some of the castles in Europe were built to defend against Muslims.

However, the vast majority of European castles were built to defend against other Europeans. **** all to do with Muslims.

I'm not all that surprised - Fascists do have a tendency to rewrite history.

I live in a European country with a **** ton of castles, and not a single one of them was built to defend against Muslims.

#84 to #81 - anon id: 082ca125

Reply+49

(12/06/2017)[-]

Or, and this is like a really crazy idea I'm throwing out there btw

They were built not to keep a specific group of people out, but to keep out those that wished to do harm to the citizens behind the walls and gates you mong

#87 to #84 - mormagil

has deleted their comment [-]

#91 to #87 - anon id: 082ca125

Reply+14

(12/06/2017)[-]

"built to protect the Royalty and the Lords from their own people, as much as anything else"

So you're saying they were built not to keep a specific group of people out, but to keep out those that wished to do harm to the citizens behind the walls and gates

#93 to #91 - mormagil

Reply-13

(12/06/2017)[-]

No, you "mong" lmao, I'm saying that part of the reason they were built was to defend against the citizens, which you claim they were built to protect.

#95 to #93 - anon id: 082ca125

Reply+8

(12/06/2017)[-]

cit·i·zen
noun
a legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either native or naturalized.
an inhabitant of a particular town or city

Even a King is a citizen to his own city. Stop trying to justify your muslim hatred.

#96 to #95 - mormagil

Reply-9

(12/06/2017)[-]

Haha that's cool, pretend like you were referring to King's and Lords when you used the word "Citizen"

#103 to #96 - abullen

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Considering Lords; Counts; Barons etc are all "subjects to the Queen and King" despite class difference...

Oh and "The people of a monarchy in former times were regarded as the monarch's subjects who were under certain obligations such as owing allegiance to, and thereby entitled to the protection of, the Crown." The Crown being the Head of State is attributed as a or must be... Hence why its was so important for Adolf Hitler to do so Citizen and the personification of the state in of itself in this case.

#212 to #103 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

Cool, except I'm debating what this guy meant when he used the word, rather than the definition of the word. Words are pretty flexible.

Call me a mong, yet you didn't know anything you're preaching before you Googled it lmao

#216 to #212 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Except I did because I did basic history on what pertains to the rights of kings in British history and what Head of States are in comparison to the rest of the hierarchy/people in context of Adolf Hitler as aforementioned. Don’t make assumptions that I didn’t know, nor other people’s knowledge on the matter because now you look like a fool.

#99 to #96 - anon id: 082ca125

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

I used citizen to encompass all inhabitants of a city or town. Like a normal person does. If I wanted to specify, I would've used kings and lords, or serfs and peasants.

Jesus I feel like I've taken some bait.

#211 to #99 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

Okay - I don't think you really did mean the royalty but whatever I'll let you have it. I've never heard a single person refer to royalty or Lords as a Citizen, so you're the first.

All you've done is give the most generic answer for why a castle might be built, so nobody can really argue against it.

"they were built not to keep a specific group of people out, but to keep out those that wished to do harm to the citizens behind the walls and gates"

Nah, everybody had their enemies within Europe and I'm pretty sure they had those in mind when they built castles. Yeah - specific groups.

Those that wished to do harm in the vast majority of cases were other Europeans. And the castles were built in specific locations to combat those specific enemies and to control the local populations.

You're just changing the meaning of things so that the original post can sound reasonable. You and I both know it is referencing Muslims. It absolutely must be, because as I said, terrorism was rampant in Europe long before Islamic terrorists came along. So the only thing he can be referencing is the return of Muslims. I'm sure you all thought that when you read it, but now you deny it because you see it's illogical.

#92 to #84 - mormagil

Reply-15

(12/06/2017)[-]

Rofl.

>Actually believing that medieval rulers cared about their citizens.

The castles were built to protect the Royalty and the Lords from their own people, as much as anything else.

And if you're suggesting that the statement from the picture is merely claiming that a generic threat to the citizens of Europe has returned, that's ******** as well. There has been terrorism in Europe for many years.

#102 to #92 - Lookinatstuff

Reply+4

(12/06/2017)[-]

You need to look again at castles.
There typically is a large, open area behind the walls. In times of peace this was a market area, but in times of war the 'citizens' from outside the walls (farmers, serfs, call them what you will) would come into the castle for protection.

#213 to #102 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

I'm well aware of that. Would you expect the royalty and the Lords to do anything less than protect their property?

#218 to #213 - Lookinatstuff

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

I refer you back to your comment #92. My God, man, you're talking in circles.

#219 to #218 - mormagil

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

No, what I've said here and what I've said in comment 92 are completely compatible.

Think of the slave owners in America. They would treat their slaves like animals, is that not so? But if another slave owner tried to kill your slaves or steal them, are you going to protect your property or not?

#105 to #92 - abullen

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Yes... Because otherwise this happens: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War

#133 to #81 - itsasecrettoyou

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

except Spain as a whole and nearly every fortification built in the 120 year lead up to the crusades you stupid kike

#162 to #81 - Skwurll

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]

Muslims weren't mentioned specifically in the content, you're the one filling in the blanks with that so you can virtue signal and call people fascists.

Castles were built with fortifications to protect against invaders and hostile forces.

#167 to #81 - anon id: ce3416a0

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

Ask your mother Morwen or your sister Nenior how they feel about foreign invaders. As thralls and beggars do they go. And they curse thee. Ask Finduilas how she liked your bridge over the Narog. You wrought it for your purposes, yet it served mine in the end. In your pride you would not cast it down, and yet I crushed it after I sacked your halls.

#125 to #81 - anon id: 73646e79

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

you mean like the liberal fascists saying "muslims dindu nuffin?"

#82 to #81 - klaudchaser

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

that's because you already have a moat

#86 to #82 - mormagil

Reply-7

(12/06/2017)[-]

Muslims had boats.

#94 to #86 - sobetsunami#296 on commentsRank#296

Reply+5

(12/06/2017)[-]

can camels swim? hue

#119 to #86 - abullen

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

Do you KNOW what a MOAT is?

#210 to #119 - mormagil

Reply-2

(12/07/2017)[-]

Yes. Do you know what he was implying?

#217 to #210 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

The only people known to drag ships across shore are generally Vikings or the like. And you can’t use a boat in most moats, not get into said castle by doing so. And if you were to, good luck not getting shot to **** or burnt alive as well as playing to the defenders advantage in negating numerical superiority.

#220 to #217 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

Oh, so you don't understand what he was implying. The "moat" he was referring to is the ocean that surrounds the island of Britain. Not a literal moat.

#221 to #220 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

*Does not compute*

#222 to #221 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

Now you look like a fool

#223 to #222 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Are you scorned about me shooting you down for your attempt at invalidating my augment in >>#216 ?

Because that's just sad.

Also the response to the English channel being called a moat, and then saying "Muslims had boats" is a ***** response by any means that only aids it in being taken literal. Especially considering that Muslims fleets were either rather small in their time period in comparison to Englands/Frances, or obsolete in general.

#224 to #223 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

At what point do you imagine you managed to shoot me down?

"Also the response to the English channel being called a moat, and then saying "Muslims had boats" is a ***** response by any means that only aids it in being taken literal."

Hehehe okay so it's my fault you don't understand simple metaphors. Blame anything but yourself for your own idiocy.

"Especially considering that Muslims fleets were either rather small in their time period in comparison to Englands/Frances, or obsolete in general."

Lmao. "English fleet?" "Muslim fleets obsolete?" That right there shows how little you know of the time period.

Run along now, little weasel.

#225 to #224 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

No one mentioned a time period you ******* mong

#226 to #225 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

"Especially considering that Muslims fleets were either rather small in their time period in comparison to Englands/Frances, or obsolete in general." - you, Abullen, comment number 223.

Know when to give up mate. Just **** off lmao.

#227 to #226 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Formation of England 973 at the most.

The only notable Islamic navies: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_M... 654
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatimid_navy 909–1171
"Despite it being well funded and equipped, and one of the few standing navies of its time, a combination of technological and strategic factors prohibited the Fatimid navy from being able to secure supremacy at sea, let alone interdict the Crusaders' maritime lines of communication to Western Europe"

Ottoman Navy generally played alongside the French, and acted as raiders to many notable areas in the Atlantic sea between of Norway-Denmark; West England; Ireland; Iceland and possibly the 13 colonies throughout 1585-1631-ish.

In no way did it ever face an actual fleet however during this. They only faced Venetians; Egyptians; Russians and weakened Byzantines until en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Navarino in which they were they lost pretty much any semblance of armadas.

#228 to #227 - mormagil

Reply-1

(12/07/2017)[-]

What is your point?

There's not a single thing here that contradicts what I said. In fact, it contradicts what you said.

What an absolute brass neck you must have, to just pretend that the whole "No one mentioned a time period you ******* mong" didn't just happen. And still keep arguing. Lmfao.

#229 to #228 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Yes, because the ENTIRE period of France/England from their existence from 973 to now is so concise as a "time period", and not various ones. because "/" indicates OR

And Muslim navies haven't been on par with either of these 2 Naval forces, and certainly wouldn't of taken on Spain if not backed by France. And of which point they don't have technological superiority over neither either, nor have they ever had a larger amount of fleets/military ships in general. The advantage was rather that they had political play; numbers 1:1 and the more advanced land forces and siege equipment, until the 15th century, in which they went on the backblast of France/'Germany'/Britain.

Bring me up one contrarian source to depict that a Muslim navy has matched Englands/Frances. And I mean their NAVY.

#230 to #229 - mormagil

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

"Bring me up one contrarian source to depict that a Muslim navy has matched Englands/Frances. And I mean their NAVY."

No, because I haven't claimed otherwise a single time in this conversation. Not a single time. You're making up arguments that aren't happening to avoid admitting when you've been beat on other points.

#231 to #230 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Lmao. "English fleet?" "Muslim fleets obsolete?" That right there shows how little you know of the time period. >>#224

What other point have you beat me on? A metaphor that I interpreted as you taking it seriously? Wow, crazy.

#232 to #231 - mormagil

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

This statement:

"Muslim navy has matched Englands/Frances."

Does not equal this statement:

"Lmao. "English fleet?" "Muslim fleets obsolete?" That right there shows how little you know of the time period."

Keep trying kid.

#235 to #232 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

Right, if I state "Lmao. Russian tanks? US tanks obsolete? That right there shows how little you know of the time period"

It directly equates to: "Yeah no, US tanks are comparable/better etc" given the disregarding comment.

#236 to #235 - mormagil

(12/07/2017)[-]

It doesn't "directly equate to that" at all.

You have assumed that I am comparing the two statements "English fleet" and "Muslim fleets obsolete". I was questioning them separately, and you yourself disproved these same statements in comment number 227.

The reason I questioned "English fleets" is because, as you say, England hadn't been truly formed yet, and besides that the land itself was constantly raided by other seafaring nations, so you bringing up English fleets is silly. Sure, they had a ******** navy during the imperial years. But to bring that up during this conversation is meaningless.

And as for your statement "Muslim fleets obsolete", you disproved that pretty well yourself.

#233 to #232 - abullen

Reply0

(12/07/2017)[-]

"That right there shows how little you know of the time period." This does.

#234 to #233 - mormagil

(12/07/2017)[-]

Okay, let's compare that specifically:

"That right there shows how little you know of the time period."

"Muslim navy has matched Englands/Frances"

You see no difference in these two statements? Lmao wtf

#175 to #86 - anon id: cd64b91a

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

had.

#127 to #86 - anon id: 73646e79

Reply0

(12/06/2017)[-]

funny how muslims used to know how to use boats, now tons of them end up ******* them up and washing up on european shores

#1 - sidnineonefourtwo

Reply+28

(12/06/2017)[-]

******* amateur Doombuilder, forgot the actual ******* door.

#98 - abullen

Reply+25

(12/06/2017)[-]

Pfft, you call that fortified walls and gate.

#129 to #98 - Monopolus

Reply+11

(12/06/2017)[-]

that looks legit beautiful, i wonder how nice it looked in its prime.

#14 - kennyh#139 on contentRank#139

Reply+22

(12/06/2017)[-]

You know what I would do if my country was rapidly devolving into a third world ******** that has to defend from truck attacks and specifically outlaw acid attacks because they are a real threat? Start an anti Trump Channel and constantly ******** anti-trump stuff to ignore what was going on in my own country.

#50 - springbok#11 on commentsRank#11

Reply+19

(12/06/2017)[-]

Jihad bells, jihad bells, jihad all the way
Oh, what fun it is to ride on a 300 horse power slay

Dashing through the crowds
On a 300 horse power slay
Over the people we go
Laughing all the way

#61 to #50 - Einsty#437 on commentsRank#437

Reply+2

(12/06/2017)[-]

#109 to #50 - abullen

Reply+1

(12/06/2017)[-]