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

hide menu

duudegladiator    

Rank #6597 on Comments
duudegladiator Avatar Level 264 Comments: Pure Win
Offline
Send mail to duudegladiator Block duudegladiator Invite duudegladiator to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:5/02/2012
Last Login:7/10/2014
Location:Your vagina
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#6597
Highest Content Rank:#3741
Highest Comment Rank:#1513
Content Thumbs: 754 total,  854 ,  100
Comment Thumbs: 6481 total,  9526 ,  3045
Content Level Progress: 20% (2/10)
Level 75 Content: FJ Cultist → Level 76 Content: FJ Cultist
Comment Level Progress: 0% (0/100)
Level 264 Comments: Pure Win → Level 265 Comments: Pure Win
Subscribers:0
Content Views:45589
Times Content Favorited:34 times
Total Comments Made:2759
FJ Points:8123

latest user's comments

#32 - So then if we eliminate the oxydization, then the nitrogen wou…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/22/2013 on Liquid Nitrogen Poured into... 0
User avatar #33 - Nihatclodra (09/22/2013) [-]
If we genetically altered ourselves at a molecular level, so that we could survive on Nitrogen instead of Oxygen: then lives in an Atmosphere without any oxygen: Our life expectancy would skyrocket.

It ain't gonna happen though.
#27 - Right, but what if we get some sort of apparatus to slowly all…  [+] (2 new replies) 09/21/2013 on Liquid Nitrogen Poured into... 0
User avatar #29 - Jewssassin (09/21/2013) [-]
Why would we even want to do that? Alittle bit less then %25 of the atmosphere is oxygen, and you dont even use all the oxygen you breath in every time.
User avatar #28 - thegamerslife (09/21/2013) [-]
I think it would take a few steps of evolution to get to that point, but even then you just end up oxygenating your blood (metals in your blood) quicker and end up with more problems.
#19 - So, your saying, if there was no nitrogen in the air, our slow…  [+] (7 new replies) 09/21/2013 on Liquid Nitrogen Poured into... +2
User avatar #30 - Nihatclodra (09/21/2013) [-]
Oxygen is actually what slowly kills us. The reason why we "get old" after becoming fully grown is due to oxidization.
User avatar #32 - duudegladiator (09/22/2013) [-]
So then if we eliminate the oxydization, then the nitrogen would keep us from dying?
User avatar #33 - Nihatclodra (09/22/2013) [-]
If we genetically altered ourselves at a molecular level, so that we could survive on Nitrogen instead of Oxygen: then lives in an Atmosphere without any oxygen: Our life expectancy would skyrocket.

It ain't gonna happen though.
User avatar #26 - thegamerslife (09/21/2013) [-]
We aren't designed to breathe 100% oxygen. js
User avatar #27 - duudegladiator (09/21/2013) [-]
Right, but what if we get some sort of apparatus to slowly allow our bodies to breath 100% oxygen.
User avatar #29 - Jewssassin (09/21/2013) [-]
Why would we even want to do that? Alittle bit less then %25 of the atmosphere is oxygen, and you dont even use all the oxygen you breath in every time.
User avatar #28 - thegamerslife (09/21/2013) [-]
I think it would take a few steps of evolution to get to that point, but even then you just end up oxygenating your blood (metals in your blood) quicker and end up with more problems.
#34 - Troy. He is Agamenon, the original ruler of Greece. 09/19/2013 on Messing with wrong numbers 0
#3 - I now have ideas. Need to get phone tho  [+] (2 new replies) 09/19/2013 on Messing with wrong numbers +55
#33 - anonymous (09/19/2013) [-]
Where is that gif from?
User avatar #34 - duudegladiator (09/19/2013) [-]
Troy. He is Agamenon, the original ruler of Greece.
#10 - Picture 09/17/2013 on what a twist 0
#7 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 09/17/2013 on what a twist +2
#9 - vorarephilia (09/17/2013) [-]
#10 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
#32 - I have too many and not enough care to post them. Sorry Supern… 09/17/2013 on Awkward +2
#31 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 09/17/2013 on Awkward +3
#32 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
I have too many and not enough care to post them. Sorry Supernatural bros!
#30 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 09/17/2013 on Awkward +4
#31 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
#32 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
I have too many and not enough care to post them. Sorry Supernatural bros!
#29 - Picture  [+] (3 new replies) 09/17/2013 on Awkward +2
#30 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
#31 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
#32 - duudegladiator (09/17/2013) [-]
I have too many and not enough care to post them. Sorry Supernatural bros!
#9 - Picture 09/16/2013 on Equal Rights 0
#47474 - If Ryan had just spoken up and not been a boyscout of Politici… 09/16/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
#47473 - I really think that Syria needs to be opened up in terms of In…  [+] (6 new replies) 09/16/2013 on Politics - politics news,... 0
User avatar #47475 - byposted (09/16/2013) [-]
The Syrian Army is portrayed as the bad guy by the media because the West has established that they want Syria to never be a legitimate country again. Thus it does not matter what the reality is. In order to legitimize intervention, for instance, Obama must portray Assad as a baby killer. Will there be any talk of his secularism or how the civil war stemmed from his liberalization policies which went down a slippery slope leading to the protests? No.

Would people be convinced that the bombing of Libya was a good thing if they knew the true character of Qaddafi; how hard he worked for his nation and the continent of Africa? Of course not. So the media made up ridiculous tales of his troops being given sexual enhancers.

Would the Americans and Canadians have been willing to send their sons oversees to battle Germans in a fight unrelated to their interests if they were not bombarded with such propaganda as "the crucified soldier" in the 1910s?
User avatar #47479 - pebar (09/16/2013) [-]
America was selling arms and supplies to Europe before they got involved in WW1. The moment the allies looked like they were going to lose, America was like"NOOOO WE MUST PROTECT OUR INVESTMENT."
User avatar #47498 - byposted (09/16/2013) [-]
Funny how this correlates well with what has happened in Libya and Syria. We only started bombing Qaddafi when it was clear that he was winning, analysts predicted that proxy support to the Libyan terrorists would have been suffice at first for regime change; the war-drums for Syria were pulled out only when the Syrian Army was making its largest advancements yet in the war, months ago.

The Americans, of course, began to intervene directly in the Great War only when the Germans began to obtain the upper hand on the Western front as Lenin purposefully destroyed the Russian Army.

The argument of protecting investments works very well and illustrates the point I have been making on this board in regards to the Syria issue. The US government and its regional allies are making heavy investments in the Syrian opposition and only now that it is starting to falter do you see the big player in this game, USA, threatening to intervene directly to protect these investments. Nothing is about chemical weapons or babies as nothing in the Great War was about "German barbarity" or a warmongering Kaiser who wanted to take over the entire world.
User avatar #47500 - pebar (09/16/2013) [-]
But the allies bought all their supplies on credit which was why america had to protect its interests. As far as I know, transactions to the middle east are all cash.
User avatar #47523 - byposted (09/16/2013) [-]
That's the technical difference but the concept is much the same.

What differs between the two situations is that America in WWI tied itself to the allied cause while in Syria it tied itself to legitimacy, if you will. What remains the same is that America is acting as a global power with its interests in mind.

In WWI, it stood for money which it lent with interest. In Syria, it too stands for the financial. Why do the oil-rich states of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and UAE want Assad gone? It would harm their biggest competitors: Iran and Russia. Why does the US view Iran and Russia as enemies in the field of oil-trade? They don't utilize the precious dollar while Saudi Arabia and company does. The oil-trade is such that competition makes you lose billions daily. Is a victorious Syria much different than a victorious Germany, then? We're speaking of two very skewed scales when comparing WWI and Syria.

Let us put this into perspective. The total debt that was owed to the US after WWI by the various allied countries was around $184,000,000,000 (inflation taken into account). The total amount of crude oil traded everyday is around 87 million barrels. Rounding down the price of crude oil to just $110 a barrel, this global trade rakes in $9,570,000,000 daily. This means that every 20 days the value of all America's aid in WWI is met in crude oil trade. And this is just the trade. America gave her aid out in the span of years.

The terrorists in Syria are not paying for the vast amount of armaments they're receiving for they have little money, though the countries that are supplying them want Assad out of power in exchange for this overwhelming support. This is because they gain in the long term.

Do you know how much money the bombing of Libya costed? Billions. And it was all worth taking Libya back to the stone age under this pricetag according to NA Qaddafi's head was worth billions to some important people.
User avatar #47524 - byposted (09/16/2013) [-]
according to NATO*
#45 - It's our fault that we try to intervene to "keep the peac…  [+] (4 new replies) 09/16/2013 on Knock knock. . . -1
User avatar #72 - Onemanretardpack (09/16/2013) [-]
That's so stupid though. We don't imperialize anything. I find it funny that the country that was most imperialistic (Britain) now has the most people with a negative view of the US and think's we're imperialistic
#80 - anonymous (09/16/2013) [-]
Britain matured, America has yet
User avatar #86 - Onemanretardpack (09/16/2013) [-]
So a country that's never made an empire out of conquering other nations and exploiting their indigenous peoples and their resources is less mature than the nation that lost their vast empire that they made through the means mentioned above, and is now turning its nose up at us?
#97 - anonymous (09/16/2013) [-]
read up on some history dude, Britain let go of her colonies because the colonies were mostly independent, with independent rulers or mayors or crazy shit like that. they were paying "tributes" to britain.

and while 'MURICA doesn't physicaly conquer nations, they instead place marionette governments that are friendly or does what ever 'MURICA demands. and when all shit goes to hell, 'MURICA screams terrorists and then invade.
#91 - Picture 09/13/2013 on Not a whole religion did... +3
#21 - Picture 09/11/2013 on No Diving 0
#90 - Nope increased ALOT  [+] (1 new reply) 09/11/2013 on (Untitled) 0
User avatar #107 - reaperriley (09/11/2013) [-]
Welp, the reports I had read during the last election stated otherwise. Better check out those sources again.
#36 - 1. UN Inspectors said "Chemical weapons were used" i…  [+] (8 new replies) 09/10/2013 on (Untitled) -1
User avatar #47 - reaperriley (09/10/2013) [-]
While I agree with you man I need to correct you on something. Our debt is actually getting lessened. I think over Obama's first term we reduced our deficit by 500 billion.
User avatar #107 - reaperriley (09/11/2013) [-]
Welp, the reports I had read during the last election stated otherwise. Better check out those sources again.
User avatar #42 - mynameisgeorge (09/10/2013) [-]
1. You're right, because civilians have access to chemical weapons. And every other country is just dying to invade Syria for no reason.

2. Any economist will tell you debt isn't always a bad thing, you need to spend money to make money. There's such a thing as good debt, debt that you get when you spend it on useful things like buying stock or another country's debt to help you in the long run. Besides, the US debt is a trivial topic since American companies are constantly invested in because everyone knows its economy is strong. The only reason we have a large debt is because we keep buying cheap Chinese labor, which benefits the nation as a whole anyway. And this "war economy" comes with research and development. You know, the stuff that brought us smoke detectors, gps, the microwave, and ARPANET aka the predecessor to the fucking internet.
3. Corruption happens in literally every government :"if you look at it" which is fucking retarded because there aren't statistics for corruption, a lot of Europe is way worse (i.e Italy, Spain, Greece, Helmut Schmidt's East German spy in the 80s)
4. There is no "rampant in crease on taxes" the only increases were on cigarettes and assets to Obamacare
5. HOW MANY Americans are on foodstamps? I'll tell you, it's 15%, And I deal with them every day since I work in retail, somehow most are still able to afford about 100 dollars of items a week and that's after SNAP has been applied. Somehow they all can afford iPhones.

But yeah, you're right, America is shit, go move to Cambodia where they have job security. Or just move to Europe, where they like everyone (that's born in their own respective countries)._ It's not like Europeans are still coming to America, especially not for college, I totally don't know any European immigrants at my university._
User avatar #136 - undeadwill (09/11/2013) [-]
You know you can make Chemical weapons at home right? Its really fucking easy.
User avatar #155 - mynameisgeorge (09/11/2013) [-]
Ok, let me rephrase that.

Do you think civilians in Syria have access to massive vats and enough ammonia and bleach to fill them, and then a way to distill that mixture into a gaseous state and have enough people to go around and attack others with it?

Also, it's not "really fucking easy" just because you bought the anarchist's cookbook in 6th grade doesn't mean you're a chemical weapons expert.
#169 - anonymous (09/11/2013) [-]
They've made improvised mortars and artillery, the UN even said the vehicle used for launching the chemicals was primitive at best, that doesn't exactly sound like something a professional army would use, that sounds like someone made that shit in their backyard.
User avatar #159 - undeadwill (09/11/2013) [-]
Yes they would.
#109 - I completely agree. Michael Myers should have rethought being …  [+] (1 new reply) 09/09/2013 on Japan's "Game of Thones"... +1
User avatar #110 - yuukoku (09/09/2013) [-]
I'm telling you anyway. It's because they're a bunch of peasants and are uncivilized. The Chinese that went there with Chiang Kai-shek after the Communists took over were all smart and rich, so they established a stable country with a relatively stable political system, but the majority of the people in Taiwan before they got there were a bunch of farmers. It was kind of backwater. Now, they are just sort of mixed together.

Mike Myers was alright in SNL. He wasn't Eddie Murphy or John Belushi, but he was alright. Honestly, he should have done something else.
#107 - Anyone else watch Cat in the Hat(human version) and see the T…  [+] (3 new replies) 09/09/2013 on Japan's "Game of Thones"... 0
#108 - yuukoku (09/09/2013) [-]
Yeah, that movie sucked. That joke made me raugh because I love the racist stereotypes, (my family knows why the Taiwanese act like that. I could explain if you'd like, but it'll be kinda long.) I think the adult jokes, the mixed moral messages, and the pop-culture themes made Dr.Seuss do fucking backflips in his grave.
User avatar #109 - duudegladiator (09/09/2013) [-]
I completely agree. Michael Myers should have rethought being in that movie. I don't really want to get into the specifics of why Taiwan does such things in a political venue, but i still get a good blow off the nose when i remember the babysitter cheering on a diplomat.
User avatar #110 - yuukoku (09/09/2013) [-]
I'm telling you anyway. It's because they're a bunch of peasants and are uncivilized. The Chinese that went there with Chiang Kai-shek after the Communists took over were all smart and rich, so they established a stable country with a relatively stable political system, but the majority of the people in Taiwan before they got there were a bunch of farmers. It was kind of backwater. Now, they are just sort of mixed together.

Mike Myers was alright in SNL. He wasn't Eddie Murphy or John Belushi, but he was alright. Honestly, he should have done something else.
#1 - Who the **** would do that?  [+] (3 new replies) 09/09/2013 on Girls microwave cat for vine +1
User avatar #17 - brrigg (09/09/2013) [-]
you mean make a joke about microwaving a cat? idk, the internet?
User avatar #3 - matjes (09/09/2013) [-]
bitches
User avatar #5 - reican (09/09/2013) [-]
don't forget the male dogs too. but you should see the shits cats do to dogs
#7 - Alaska has alot more planes than cars from what i know, their … 09/08/2013 on Just a Random Fact 0
#55 - Picture 09/08/2013 on Tumblr Canada -2
#14 - Comment deleted 09/07/2013 on The Best Way To Go... 0
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2200

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
Anonymous commenting is allowed
User avatar #15 - thejokerhatesyou (08/25/2012) [-]
**thejokerhatesyou rolls 3**
User avatar #22 to #1 - melwach (02/21/2013) [-]
Can I see you at the olympics 2016?
User avatar #23 to #22 - duudegladiator (02/21/2013) [-]
Sure. Representing the non-fat Americans. xD
User avatar #21 to #1 - duudegladiator (09/29/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 7**
User avatar #20 to #1 - duudegladiator (09/29/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 7**
User avatar #19 to #1 - duudegladiator (09/29/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 3**
User avatar #18 to #1 - duudegladiator (09/29/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 6**
User avatar #16 to #1 - duudegladiator (09/29/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 8**
User avatar #8 to #1 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 7**
User avatar #9 to #8 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 5**
User avatar #10 to #9 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 5**
User avatar #11 to #10 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 8**
User avatar #12 to #11 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 1**
User avatar #13 to #12 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 4**
User avatar #14 to #13 - duudegladiator (08/14/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 9**
User avatar #7 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/23/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 6**
User avatar #6 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/17/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 6**
User avatar #5 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/17/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 4**
User avatar #4 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/17/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 6**
User avatar #3 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/17/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 5**
User avatar #2 to #1 - duudegladiator (07/17/2012) [-]
**duudegladiator rolls 1**
 Friends (0)