Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

drakthaal    

Rank #14381 on Comments
no avatar Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius
Online
Send mail to drakthaal Block drakthaal Invite drakthaal to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 21
Consoles Owned: xbox, xbox 360, ps1, ps2, pc
Date Signed Up:6/25/2011
Last Login:7/12/2014
Location:kongsberg in NORWAY
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#14381
Highest Content Rank:#22837
Highest Comment Rank:#4997
Content Thumbs: 4 total,  16 ,  12
Comment Thumbs: 1370 total,  1855 ,  485
Content Level Progress: 13.55% (8/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 37% (37/100)
Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:0
Content Views:3205
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:548
FJ Points:1359

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

youtube videos

latest user's comments

#143 - the south African president himself has personally accused the… 07/10/2014 on Just pointing out the obvious 0
#94 - no the Israeli state is an apartheid state. that is my first p…  [+] (2 new replies) 07/10/2014 on Just pointing out the obvious -2
#121 - anonymousfourchan (07/10/2014) [-]
"no the Israeli state is an apartheid state"

The fuck it is, muslims have more freedom in Israel than they do in other, Muslim countries, comparing the Actual apartheid South africa to Israel is nothing but bullshit.

"the second is the way they capture land"

The way they Bought it from the actual landlords (the palestinians mostly didn't own the land) from the 1840s to 1948, by the partition plan the UN formed, or by combat from the Numerous wars the arab states started with Israel?
First method is fully acceptable financially.
Second one is what the UN proposed each side would get.
Third is the law of war, don't want to lose land? don't start a war.
The arab states attacked Israel as soon as it was formed and several times again, losing more land to Israel in each war.

Israel even gave back the sinai desert to Egypt, despite it being an important buffert zone against a potentially (again) hostile Egypt.

"check facts from booth sides and independent sources."

Your "sources" may or may not be independent, but they sure sound biased.

Attached is the main development of Israeli borders.
First we have the partition plan, the arabs didn't accept this plan and attacked, lost 60% of the proposed arab state to Israel. Jordan took control of most of the westbank.
Second one is the result of these first wars.
Last one is after the six day war where Israel took the westbank and the golan heights from Jordan, and the sinai desert from Egypt (again, laws of war)
#143 - drakthaal (07/10/2014) [-]
the south African president himself has personally accused them of being an apartheid state. do you even know what an apartheid state is? inside Israel there are different rules for Israelis and Palestinians i am guessing you are american or Israeli because that is the only way you could have missed that tucking fact. and if they had kept the Sinai desert they would have still been at war with Egypt. and your map is missing all the damn settlements protected by Israeli forces on Palestinian soil. which war not taken during war. which is why 80 percent of the world condemn Israeli policies. and by the way they take land i am referring to the fucking settlements that you seem to know jack shit about. which is what is the core of the conflict there these days. please check any independent documentary on the matter, and you will at least get a basic fucking understanding of it. most of the settlement are built on land they took by force deep within Palestinian territory. taking land in war is 100 percent okay with me. i have no problem with it. chasing out the people living there or making them second class citizens is the definition of fucking apartheid which is why the entirety of europe has major problems with Israeli politics.
#9 - look at the result of the rocket attacks. a tactical nuke and …  [+] (4 new replies) 07/10/2014 on Just pointing out the obvious 0
#91 - anonymous (07/10/2014) [-]
Do you blame jews for being able to avoid mass casualties? If sand people could make better rockets, would you love jews more?
#94 - drakthaal (07/10/2014) [-]
no the Israeli state is an apartheid state. that is my first problem with it.
the second is the way they capture land. you should actually research the conflict a bit check facts from booth sides and independent sources.
#121 - anonymousfourchan (07/10/2014) [-]
"no the Israeli state is an apartheid state"

The fuck it is, muslims have more freedom in Israel than they do in other, Muslim countries, comparing the Actual apartheid South africa to Israel is nothing but bullshit.

"the second is the way they capture land"

The way they Bought it from the actual landlords (the palestinians mostly didn't own the land) from the 1840s to 1948, by the partition plan the UN formed, or by combat from the Numerous wars the arab states started with Israel?
First method is fully acceptable financially.
Second one is what the UN proposed each side would get.
Third is the law of war, don't want to lose land? don't start a war.
The arab states attacked Israel as soon as it was formed and several times again, losing more land to Israel in each war.

Israel even gave back the sinai desert to Egypt, despite it being an important buffert zone against a potentially (again) hostile Egypt.

"check facts from booth sides and independent sources."

Your "sources" may or may not be independent, but they sure sound biased.

Attached is the main development of Israeli borders.
First we have the partition plan, the arabs didn't accept this plan and attacked, lost 60% of the proposed arab state to Israel. Jordan took control of most of the westbank.
Second one is the result of these first wars.
Last one is after the six day war where Israel took the westbank and the golan heights from Jordan, and the sinai desert from Egypt (again, laws of war)
#143 - drakthaal (07/10/2014) [-]
the south African president himself has personally accused them of being an apartheid state. do you even know what an apartheid state is? inside Israel there are different rules for Israelis and Palestinians i am guessing you are american or Israeli because that is the only way you could have missed that tucking fact. and if they had kept the Sinai desert they would have still been at war with Egypt. and your map is missing all the damn settlements protected by Israeli forces on Palestinian soil. which war not taken during war. which is why 80 percent of the world condemn Israeli policies. and by the way they take land i am referring to the fucking settlements that you seem to know jack shit about. which is what is the core of the conflict there these days. please check any independent documentary on the matter, and you will at least get a basic fucking understanding of it. most of the settlement are built on land they took by force deep within Palestinian territory. taking land in war is 100 percent okay with me. i have no problem with it. chasing out the people living there or making them second class citizens is the definition of fucking apartheid which is why the entirety of europe has major problems with Israeli politics.
#9 - no one expects another country to know the inner working your … 07/09/2014 on Naming conventions 0
#46 - source on them being the most atractive source on the fac…  [+] (1 new reply) 07/08/2014 on tis true 0
User avatar #97 - khajiithaswares (07/08/2014) [-]
Based on this study, the only thing you need to be hot is to have light hair and light colored eyes.
#42 - they are, there has been studies on attractiveness of females …  [+] (4 new replies) 07/08/2014 on tis true +2
#108 - captainprincess (07/08/2014) [-]
Nnnnah
#45 - anonymous (07/08/2014) [-]
Source this or bullshit.
#46 - drakthaal (07/08/2014) [-]
source on them being the most atractive www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2162181/Ukrainian-Swedish-women-named-worlds-best-looking.html
source on the fact they kidnaped the pretiest ones could not find a good scientifc paper on it by a quick google search but if you search you will find it historicalnovelists.tripod.com/femvikng.htm
User avatar #97 - khajiithaswares (07/08/2014) [-]
Based on this study, the only thing you need to be hot is to have light hair and light colored eyes.
#52 - a oil because there are a very many types of oil so a oil is r…  [+] (2 new replies) 07/01/2014 on Interesting Facts +1
#106 - tksparty (07/01/2014) [-]
It's 'an oil'.
User avatar #110 - norwegiandude (07/01/2014) [-]
THANK YOU
#10 - you do realise how complicated matches are right, they are an …  [+] (4 new replies) 07/01/2014 on Interesting Facts +43
#40 - anonymous (07/01/2014) [-]
" a oil"..... WTF
same thing when people say "can I have a fry?" or "a water"

Just how does that make any sense?
#52 - drakthaal (07/01/2014) [-]
a oil because there are a very many types of oil so a oil is referring to a type of oil
#106 - tksparty (07/01/2014) [-]
It's 'an oil'.
User avatar #110 - norwegiandude (07/01/2014) [-]
THANK YOU
#89 - no it is not 36,000 compared to 26,000 not that big of a diffe…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/24/2014 on SuperNova -3
User avatar #94 - SonofChuck (06/24/2014) [-]
10,000 people seems pretty big to me but I see you point. The answer to your question I would say yes, you do have the right to not take precautions to increase your safety, that said not wearing a seatbelt is not always about yourself it's also about the people in the car with you and it wouldn't be fair to jeopardize the safety of the other occupants because you don't want to wear a seatbelt.
#77 - they wil also have to deal with my body if i somehow fall and …  [+] (3 new replies) 06/24/2014 on SuperNova -3
User avatar #85 - SonofChuck (06/24/2014) [-]
Car accidents are far more common though. Not that your not right though people do die from falling on their heads.
#89 - drakthaal (06/24/2014) [-]
no it is not 36,000 compared to 26,000 not that big of a difference. the question is do i have a right not to take precautions increasing my safety. and when you think about it. this is a very important issue.
User avatar #94 - SonofChuck (06/24/2014) [-]
10,000 people seems pretty big to me but I see you point. The answer to your question I would say yes, you do have the right to not take precautions to increase your safety, that said not wearing a seatbelt is not always about yourself it's also about the people in the car with you and it wouldn't be fair to jeopardize the safety of the other occupants because you don't want to wear a seatbelt.

user's channels

Join Subscribe doctor-who
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 615 / Total items point value: 1035

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#2 - danield ONLINE (03/18/2014) [-]
stickied by drakthaal
>tfw
#1 - Shnappley **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
 Friends (0)