"That Was Deep!" "No, You're Just Stupid."
- Thread starter Eggsnham
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Decamper said:
Might be a bit innaccurate, but the point still stands ;PFamily Guy said:
My friend once thought that anything that glowed green was radioactive, and then came to the conclusion that the grass in the sunlight would give him cancer. Funniest hour I've ever spent with him.
Hitler was also Jewish, yet he killed 6 million Jews. Like I said, I don't know enough about Hitler to make a definitive statement about his sexuality, but I can tell you that saying "He had sex with girls and killed gays!" doesn't prove much in the way of Hitler.Lockstitch said:
I have several, all from basic training (US Army) and all from the same young lady.
The first two come from a portion of training wherein you are exptected to demonstrate you have properly learned several key skills in the previous weeks. The first was simply placing an M18 Claymore mine. For those who are unaware, on the front of the weapon written in very large embossed lettering is the simple phrase "FRONT TOWARDS ENEMY". I had long wondered just who was stupid enough to need the hint that the most dangrous potion of the weapon ought to be pointed at the people you wanted to kill.
The process for arming a claymore is pretty simple. You simply stick the mine into the ground facing the proper direction, insert the blasting cap and detonation wire, unroll the wire to a safe firing point (the lethal radius of the weapon is >75m to the back, >200m to the front), attach the M57 firing device, and then activate.
Upon my (successful) completion, the drill sergeant turned to this young lady and congratulated her. During his pause she was literally beaming with pride until he continued "Because you just killed yourself". Apparently, she thought she needed to be able to read the "FRONT TOWARDS ENEMY" because clearly this would be written on the back (how else could she remind herself which way was the front).
The second came with a demonstration of our ability to prep and fire an AT-4 (a disposable, light anti-armor weapon). The process has only a handful of steps - pull down a strap and attach it properly (so when you fire the tube doesn't just fly off your shoulder), flip up the sighting apparatus, cock the weapon and then press the fire switch once a target has been acquired.
The best part is, the AT-4 has directions printed on the sides. And, just in case the user cannot read (or cannot read English at any rate) the directions are printed in picture form. When holding the weapon you can see the graphic for the entire process. In spite of this, or the fact that there were people on either side of her doing it properly, this young lady cocked, fired, then deployed the shoulder strap and sight.
The last, and most incredible, came when we were learning how to properly load an M-249. For most here, the basic process is relatively simple. You open the feed tray, load the first round at the proper point in the the feed tray such that the belt is entering through the left side of the weapon, close the tray, and cock the weapon. At this point it is ready to fire.
I can understand loading the weapon from the wrong side. It would fire once, and then the belt would fall to the ground, but at least it would function. I would even understand loading the rounds backwards because at least the feed tray was closed. What she was trying to do was so mind boggling that I'm not sure simple words can describe it.
She was holding the belt of (thankfully dummy) ammunition such that the base of the round (where the primer is) was resting upon the feed tray (and the tip of the round, the actual bullet was pointing into the air). She then had the belt running such that the first round was near the barrel and the last was near the stock of the weapon. Because of the precarious postion, she was HOLDING the rounds in place while trying to slam the feed tray closed. Should she succeed at overpowering the structural strength of the rounds, she would succeed in crushing her hand as well.
To put it another way, imagine a 3D axis. the belt OUGHT to point (bullet side) down the positive x-axis and proceed from an arbitrary point on the positive y-axis to the origin (the negative y-axis is where the shells are ejected). She had the bullets pointing down the positive z-axis with the belt running from an arbitrary point on the negative x-axis to the origin.
The first two come from a portion of training wherein you are exptected to demonstrate you have properly learned several key skills in the previous weeks. The first was simply placing an M18 Claymore mine. For those who are unaware, on the front of the weapon written in very large embossed lettering is the simple phrase "FRONT TOWARDS ENEMY". I had long wondered just who was stupid enough to need the hint that the most dangrous potion of the weapon ought to be pointed at the people you wanted to kill.
The process for arming a claymore is pretty simple. You simply stick the mine into the ground facing the proper direction, insert the blasting cap and detonation wire, unroll the wire to a safe firing point (the lethal radius of the weapon is >75m to the back, >200m to the front), attach the M57 firing device, and then activate.
Upon my (successful) completion, the drill sergeant turned to this young lady and congratulated her. During his pause she was literally beaming with pride until he continued "Because you just killed yourself". Apparently, she thought she needed to be able to read the "FRONT TOWARDS ENEMY" because clearly this would be written on the back (how else could she remind herself which way was the front).
The second came with a demonstration of our ability to prep and fire an AT-4 (a disposable, light anti-armor weapon). The process has only a handful of steps - pull down a strap and attach it properly (so when you fire the tube doesn't just fly off your shoulder), flip up the sighting apparatus, cock the weapon and then press the fire switch once a target has been acquired.
The best part is, the AT-4 has directions printed on the sides. And, just in case the user cannot read (or cannot read English at any rate) the directions are printed in picture form. When holding the weapon you can see the graphic for the entire process. In spite of this, or the fact that there were people on either side of her doing it properly, this young lady cocked, fired, then deployed the shoulder strap and sight.
The last, and most incredible, came when we were learning how to properly load an M-249. For most here, the basic process is relatively simple. You open the feed tray, load the first round at the proper point in the the feed tray such that the belt is entering through the left side of the weapon, close the tray, and cock the weapon. At this point it is ready to fire.
I can understand loading the weapon from the wrong side. It would fire once, and then the belt would fall to the ground, but at least it would function. I would even understand loading the rounds backwards because at least the feed tray was closed. What she was trying to do was so mind boggling that I'm not sure simple words can describe it.
She was holding the belt of (thankfully dummy) ammunition such that the base of the round (where the primer is) was resting upon the feed tray (and the tip of the round, the actual bullet was pointing into the air). She then had the belt running such that the first round was near the barrel and the last was near the stock of the weapon. Because of the precarious postion, she was HOLDING the rounds in place while trying to slam the feed tray closed. Should she succeed at overpowering the structural strength of the rounds, she would succeed in crushing her hand as well.
To put it another way, imagine a 3D axis. the belt OUGHT to point (bullet side) down the positive x-axis and proceed from an arbitrary point on the positive y-axis to the origin (the negative y-axis is where the shells are ejected). She had the bullets pointing down the positive z-axis with the belt running from an arbitrary point on the negative x-axis to the origin.
Actually no. Sound happens regardless of what is around to percieve it, as sound is vibrations in the air. That's like saying dolphins don't exist because you can't see them right now.Zosephine said:
Wow. Just wow. I might not know a lot about military weapons, but I find it kind of hard to screw things up when the directions are literally staring at you.Eclectic Dreck said:
Also, I laughed as I thought of what the Instructors must've said about her performance.
This, like many other rumors, is totally false. Adolf Hitler was a Catholic by upbringing, and retained some form of theism as is suggested by his references to a Creator in 'Mein Kampf'. He never publicly stated a definite alliance with any particular religion. While later in life he vehemently opposed Christianity (supposedly because it was a branch of Judaism), he actually drew on his knowledge of the Catholic hierarchical structure when building his own hierarchy.Eggsnham said:
I most definitely said nothing like that. The term homosexual means to have relations with solely the same gender; therefore, Hitler's multiple female companions are very definite proof that we was not gay. Bisexual, you could say, but to claim he was homosexual is just ignorant.
My ex.
After everything I said.
Especially when I mentioned WWII.
"Luftwaffe? THAT'S THE FUNNIEST WORD I'VE HEARD IN A LONG TIME!!!!!"
After everything I said.
Especially when I mentioned WWII.
"Luftwaffe? THAT'S THE FUNNIEST WORD I'VE HEARD IN A LONG TIME!!!!!"
Being Jewish is more than a religion, a Jew, could be Jewish by religion, or Jewish by race, Hitler, was Jewish by race, at least partly.Lockstitch said:
And while I don't necessarily agree with your statement about his sexuality, I can agree that him have relations with women and (supposedly) men, would make him Bisexual and not Gay. But, I would imagine that Hitler prosecuted any type of sexuality that went against the beliefs of the time, including Bisexuality.
How was it again that you wanted to continue conversation with said man?BloodyThoughts said:
For me I had a good time convincing a person I know that ANCIENT Tombs are in fact ANCIENT
she got mad at me because I raised my voice at her.....................
A guy in my class thought Alaska was next to Hawaii. I'm in college. American Public Education FTW!
"Wait, World War One, that was with those Hitler Guys, right?"
"No, that was World War Two."
"I thought that one started when Japan nuked Pearl Harbor?"
I've heard an anecdote that, shortly after 9/11, a historian heard the following conversation:
"This is going to have the same consequences as Pearl Harbor."
"What's Pearl Harbor?"
"You know, it's that place that Vietnam attacked to start the Vietnam War."
I also knew someone who briefly thought that HIV/AIDS was airborne, and thrived in warm conditions. Hence the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa, and why so few people have AIDS in Canada.
There was also a guy in my biology class who believed that God created all life in 4 days some time within the last 10,000 years. Religious beliefs like that are apparently quite common in the U.S., but this guy really struggled because he refused to cite evolution as a reason for anything.
That reminds of another classmate, back in grade 7 or 8, who challenged anyone to show that anything in the Bible was untrue. I asked, "How did saltwater fish survive the salinity change when trillions of litres of rainwater, known for its purity, contaminated the oceans?" Not being one to lose a debate easily, he punched me and ran.
"No, that was World War Two."
"I thought that one started when Japan nuked Pearl Harbor?"
I've heard an anecdote that, shortly after 9/11, a historian heard the following conversation:
"This is going to have the same consequences as Pearl Harbor."
"What's Pearl Harbor?"
"You know, it's that place that Vietnam attacked to start the Vietnam War."
I also knew someone who briefly thought that HIV/AIDS was airborne, and thrived in warm conditions. Hence the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa, and why so few people have AIDS in Canada.
There was also a guy in my biology class who believed that God created all life in 4 days some time within the last 10,000 years. Religious beliefs like that are apparently quite common in the U.S., but this guy really struggled because he refused to cite evolution as a reason for anything.
That reminds of another classmate, back in grade 7 or 8, who challenged anyone to show that anything in the Bible was untrue. I asked, "How did saltwater fish survive the salinity change when trillions of litres of rainwater, known for its purity, contaminated the oceans?" Not being one to lose a debate easily, he punched me and ran.
Wait, it's pronounced "Ozzy"? The country is Ausssstralia, not Auztralia, right?Zeeky_Santos said:
Looked it up on Wikipedia, and apparently "Ossy:, "Mel-Born" and "Briz-Bayn" are considered uniquely American errors. Must be a common Canadian error as well, since we watch far more American than Australian movies.
the berlin wall is in china. this is what she thought. then she sucked my friends magical dragon tail. so, in short, she was a mentally retarded whore.
That last one isn't as racist as you might at first think, psychological studies have shown we actually have a harder time telling apart members of other races.Kharloth said:
As for the other stuff, oh dear god. She sounds like such fun, where can I get a moron girl?