Upload
Login or register

bokkos

Last status update:
-
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:4/04/2011
Last Login:8/28/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#11422
Highest Content Rank:#6551
Highest Comment Rank:#456
Content Thumbs: 522 total,  635 ,  113
Comment Thumbs: 16346 total,  19203 ,  2857
Content Level Progress: 80% (8/10)
Level 51 Content: Sammich eater → Level 52 Content: Sammich eater
Comment Level Progress: 58.1% (581/1000)
Level 315 Comments: Wizard → Level 316 Comments: Wizard
Subscribers:1
Content Views:37339
Times Content Favorited:44 times
Total Comments Made:3301
FJ Points:16508
Favorite Tags: a (2) | my (2)
Who the fuck writes in these things?

latest user's comments

#34 - I'd look up the "Trail of Tears" if I were you; that…  [+] (3 new replies) 03/15/2016 on Sisu perkele! +5
#36 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
Yes. I know all about the Trail of Tears. Again, displacement. Not genocide. The US military could have just rounded them all up and killed them. What happened to them was awful, and inexcusable, but not fitting the definition of genocide.
User avatar
#39 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
The displacement tactics were performed to take the land and abolish the communities (and by extension, the culture); any action undertaken to bring about the removal of an ethnic group by means of preventing births, active killing or displacing/diluting the population is still genocide as defined in the original UN Convention in 1951. It was a genocide, plain and simple; it destroyed an entire ethnic group of defined ethnic character and history, from an established territory. I should add, that assimilation was never an option like in the Mongol or Persian empires.
#38 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Just like the ottomans "displaced" all those greeks and armenians
#31 - A) The Native American war resulted in a genocide, so you can …  [+] (6 new replies) 03/15/2016 on Sisu perkele! +2
#32 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
A. Not really. Genocide of the Natives was more of a Spanish thing. Sure theye killed a lot of them, but they didn't begin a purposeful, and systematic extermination of Native Populations. Mostly they just displaced the natives to get them out of the way and massacred a few villages here and there.
B. Fair enough.

It was the British that burned down the White House. Not the Canadians. Plus though the war ended in a draw, the US absolutely got the better deal with the treaty that ended the war. It allowed the US to expand westward for muh Manifest Destiny and all that shit.
User avatar
#34 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
I'd look up the "Trail of Tears" if I were you; that was only one part of a targeted genocide against the Natives by the US. Canada did much the same thing, but we finally have a PM who's attempting to address the rift those actions caused.
#36 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
Yes. I know all about the Trail of Tears. Again, displacement. Not genocide. The US military could have just rounded them all up and killed them. What happened to them was awful, and inexcusable, but not fitting the definition of genocide.
User avatar
#39 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
The displacement tactics were performed to take the land and abolish the communities (and by extension, the culture); any action undertaken to bring about the removal of an ethnic group by means of preventing births, active killing or displacing/diluting the population is still genocide as defined in the original UN Convention in 1951. It was a genocide, plain and simple; it destroyed an entire ethnic group of defined ethnic character and history, from an established territory. I should add, that assimilation was never an option like in the Mongol or Persian empires.
#38 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Just like the ottomans "displaced" all those greeks and armenians
#33 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
*The US killed...
#26 - That would be right, hence the hideous embarrassments that wer…  [+] (3 new replies) 03/15/2016 on Sisu perkele! +1
User avatar
#120 - vishnarg (03/15/2016) [-]
The current state of Iraq and Syria is due to border reconstruction and artificial implementation of economic sanctions put in place by Allied European powers after World War II. When imperialism crumbled worldwide after the end of WWII, Britain basically gave the holy land to the Israelis, which obviously pissed a lot of people off and made the region violent and unstable ever since, so don't blame the US for the Middle East. We fucked up shit in Chile, El Salvador, and of course Vietnam, but Syria and Iraq have nothing to do with us cause wise.
#127 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
**anonymous used "*roll picture*"**
**anonymous rolled image** it will be relevant to the topic. I believe in admin.
#27 - iamchicken (03/15/2016) [-]
If we're great at anything.

It's ruining everything for everyone else.
#16 - Well they won a war by themselves, something the USA has yet t…  [+] (18 new replies) 03/15/2016 on Sisu perkele! +10
#132 - gerfox (03/15/2016) [-]
You know that the Finns lost that war, right?
#86 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Spanish American war much?
#35 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Hey, at least we have yet to lose a war. Korea is still going, and vietnam was never an actual war. All the "Wars" in the middle east we have won. Its just that they lead to another conflict. We killed saddam hussain? Fucking Taliban and al quida shows up. Beat them? ISIS.
#30 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
Mexican-American War.
Indian wars.
Civil War Joke
Spanish-American War.
Now name some wars your country has won by itself.
User avatar
#31 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
A) The Native American war resulted in a genocide, so you can call that a win if your morality has completely degraded.
B) Yeah the Spanish and Mexican wars technically were, although the Phillipines was an "ally" in the former

Canada doesn't pride itself on military prowess (although we do have the highest number of confirmed militant officer kills), but the 2 times America came up to "liberate" us from the British, we won and burned the White House down on the second incursion. That was before we were a nation though, so it may not count.
#32 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
A. Not really. Genocide of the Natives was more of a Spanish thing. Sure theye killed a lot of them, but they didn't begin a purposeful, and systematic extermination of Native Populations. Mostly they just displaced the natives to get them out of the way and massacred a few villages here and there.
B. Fair enough.

It was the British that burned down the White House. Not the Canadians. Plus though the war ended in a draw, the US absolutely got the better deal with the treaty that ended the war. It allowed the US to expand westward for muh Manifest Destiny and all that shit.
User avatar
#34 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
I'd look up the "Trail of Tears" if I were you; that was only one part of a targeted genocide against the Natives by the US. Canada did much the same thing, but we finally have a PM who's attempting to address the rift those actions caused.
#36 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
Yes. I know all about the Trail of Tears. Again, displacement. Not genocide. The US military could have just rounded them all up and killed them. What happened to them was awful, and inexcusable, but not fitting the definition of genocide.
User avatar
#39 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
The displacement tactics were performed to take the land and abolish the communities (and by extension, the culture); any action undertaken to bring about the removal of an ethnic group by means of preventing births, active killing or displacing/diluting the population is still genocide as defined in the original UN Convention in 1951. It was a genocide, plain and simple; it destroyed an entire ethnic group of defined ethnic character and history, from an established territory. I should add, that assimilation was never an option like in the Mongol or Persian empires.
#38 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Just like the ottomans "displaced" all those greeks and armenians
#33 - mrmcput (03/15/2016) [-]
*The US killed...
User avatar
#25 - iamchicken (03/15/2016) [-]
Why would we not make use of allies though?

Going 1v1 solo bruh sounds like a terrible idea.
User avatar
#26 - bokkos (03/15/2016) [-]
That would be right, hence the hideous embarrassments that were the Korean and Vietnam wars, and the current embarrassment that is Iraq and Syria. I'll applaud the Americans on one thing though; they sure generate a power vacuum like nobody else.
User avatar
#120 - vishnarg (03/15/2016) [-]
The current state of Iraq and Syria is due to border reconstruction and artificial implementation of economic sanctions put in place by Allied European powers after World War II. When imperialism crumbled worldwide after the end of WWII, Britain basically gave the holy land to the Israelis, which obviously pissed a lot of people off and made the region violent and unstable ever since, so don't blame the US for the Middle East. We fucked up shit in Chile, El Salvador, and of course Vietnam, but Syria and Iraq have nothing to do with us cause wise.
#127 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
**anonymous used "*roll picture*"**
**anonymous rolled image** it will be relevant to the topic. I believe in admin.
#27 - iamchicken (03/15/2016) [-]
If we're great at anything.

It's ruining everything for everyone else.
User avatar
#24 - lulzdealer (03/15/2016) [-]
Nigga the Winter War ended in a Russian victory. A pyhrric victory, but a victory.
User avatar
#17 - Ruspanic (03/15/2016) [-]
hey hey hey
we won the Civil War by ourselves
:^)
#46 - Yeah, you fell for the "Sanders supporter Nazi salute&quo… 03/15/2016 on How the Globalist Oligarchy... -3
#45 - Stray into the comments at your own risk; OP is a lying sack o…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/15/2016 on How the Globalist Oligarchy... -5
#47 - anon (03/15/2016) [-]
Wow, you take this so seriously.
#44 - It was a ******* sucker punch you lying sack of ****. …  [+] (1 new reply) 03/15/2016 on How the Globalist Oligarchy... +3
User avatar
#154 - sidnineonefourtwo (03/15/2016) [-]
Well assuming that video wasn't doctored, that guy is definitely in the wrong. No two ways about it, and it doesn't matter your party affiliation to see it. Still that person doesn't represent all Conservative supporters and it's quite deplorable that happened.

That aside that video does not clearly state Trump helped this man financially. Once all the evidence is acquired I'm pretty sure they will find that guy in the wrong and not help him legally. But you provided a legitimate source, and yes I would call that a sucker punch.
#43 - He said he'd pay the legal fees of any attendee who assaulted … 03/15/2016 on How the Globalist Oligarchy... -1
#142 - Hey, that's not true and a copout. You were talking sports tea… 03/10/2016 on Why immigration doesn't work 0
#107 - So you're saying gay rights is not going to end up on the corr…  [+] (2 new replies) 03/10/2016 on Why immigration doesn't work 0
#117 - tsc (03/10/2016) [-]
I didn't say anything about gay rights. I see now you will just see whatever it is you want to see i'm out.
User avatar
#142 - bokkos (03/10/2016) [-]
Hey, that's not true and a copout. You were talking sports teams, I was talking historical events and their relevancy. Whether I approve of gay rights or not is irrelevant, it'll still be viewed as an objectively good thing to advanced nations many years from now.