Wow, all your comments received 2 to 3 likes in 10 minutes and mine all received a dislike. Nothing fishy about that at all. Proving you are a virus and can't handle when someone proves you wrong.

I may have helped a bit with the up and down voting......just a bit!

again you're missing the point. the point is simply that you can't start a war for peace. once you start the war, there is no peace. you may resolve the conflict but there is no more peace

Ayy, you need troll support or what?

Let me make it as 1st grade simple as I can, because that is all it seems you can understand.

Fighting = violence
Peace= no violence

Screwing= sex
Virginity= no sex

The point behind this meme, as I see it, is how can one state that they are striving for peace when all they are doing is using violence? You can't strive to stay a virgin if all you do is go out and have sex. It is really that simple of what this meme is stating. Can you fight for peace? Well you can at least claim to, however you are using a non-peaceful method to obtain what you are trying to achieve.

"I don't know why people like you have to attempt placing the confusion on the other guy, but that's what you're attempting here. It's not working. I get it, you don't seem to." Right back at you.

Stating that I don't understand this meme because of my religious views is an insult towards my religion. Just because you claim it is not does not make it so.

I have gone through a lot of your memes and seen where you get into "discussions" with different people. Many of them have proven you wrong countless times because you manipulate the definitions of words and ignore other facts that are presented. So the only one who cannot ever admit to being wrong here is you. I showed a clear and descriptive example of how claiming to fight for peace only leads to more violence and never ends in peace, at least not for anyone that should have seen it in the first place. One can make the statement they are fighting for peace, but that doesn't mean that peace is going to be the ending result, as I clearly stated. So no I am not wrong here, but you are. You can not clearly fight for peace, because the violence will only bring more violence. It is a proven fact. You think taking an atomic bomb to Isis is going to solve the problem? I have seen one of your other comments in which you have stated that. I can tell you that with 100% certainty that it will not bring peace.

I am not down voting your comments because I am wrong, I am down voting your comments because you clearly don't know how to do anything but insult people who can show a clear differing opinion and just ignore all the facts that they present. So good bye, because you clearly are a virus on this site and should be avoided at all costs.

No you are still wrong because the aviation definition is more correct in the application that you were using it in. You stated that it would be crosswinds that ripped the wings off in the atmosphere. Moving winds in the atmosphere, by definition in aviation standards is wind shear. Crosswind is only effected at ground level. Game. Set. Match. You lose cock sucker.

FYI, memes are not always suppose to take a full on logical meaning. You have proven time and time again that you don't understand that, just like the meme I had about saying politics was defined as blood sucking leeches. You didn't understand the joke, or didn't want to because it was not the logical definition of the meme. The fact you use think they have to make logical sense only proves why you can't make any funny memes. I already told the admins this, and I will tell you. Because of your attacks and making my experience on this site shitty, I am now going to continue to do that to you. That is why your memes are going to constantly get flagged. Even if I have to create a new account every day from the admins deleting it, I will do that. I will only stop until the admins explain to me why you are allowed to ruin my experience on this site, as well as others that you have attacked, and yet you get free reign, that or until you delete your account. It is that simple.

Some people consider it self defense when we went to Afghan after 9/11. Do you consider that self defense?

My definition of self defense, which I have aquired being raised a Quaker, is protecting yourself and your family from intruders, it never involves any concept of war.

When you state that a country attacks without provocation, that doesn't mean they are still in the country attacking. And with today's technology, that can happen without them even phyisically coming over here, but instead sending missiles or other weapons. So what is self defense from an attack like that? By my definition of self defense there is nothing you can do and still call it self defense. Is that different than your definition?

No dude. People don't consider that self defense. And if they do they're just saying it, not actually believing it.

And you being raised a Quaker is why your definition of self defense only includes your immediate relatives/community.

Self defense of a country is what the meme is referring to though. And that's what my comment was pointing out. If a country is attacked and responds to the attack that IS self defense. The whole 9/11 thing was for resources and control only. It is a farce. But that doesn't mean that there could never be a war fought in self defense.

And you twist my words to argue over again. My statement is clear. I don't know why you want to argue over it like this.

I'll humor your argumentative side though: If Russia, for whatever reason shoots a nuke at us and destroys a single city here in the US, then yes, the US should retaliate by trying to remove their(Russia's) current government. That's simple logic. If we knew before hand that Russia was going to attack with a nuke like that, we should go over there and disable their ability to do so. THAT IS SELF DEFENSE. Plain and simple.

But my example from the other post was that if a country invaded another. If Russia were to step foot on American soil with ill intent, then the US should fight back. Again, self defense. How is this that hard to grasp? :l

I think you are confusing Afghan with Iraq. Afghan was the home of Bin Laden, who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks. The Iraq war was more or less for resources. So when we first went to attack Afghan to get Bin Laden the first time, that was retaliation not self defense, which would be like what you stated with after Russia using a nuke. However self defense is protecting yourself while the attacking is taking place, not after. The people on the plane in Pennsylvania died in self defense, going to Afghan afterwards was retaliation and acts of war, not self defense. There is a clear difference even for Quakers and the involvement of an entire country.

Self defense is never considered war. Striking before someone attacks you because you think there is evidence to show they are going to attack, that is not self defense but a preemptive strike. And like my previous statement said, when you do this, there is a never ending cycle of attacking others in the name of "peace", and should never be considered self defense. Even by Jesus' standards of turning the other cheek, it actually means to do no more damage than what they did to you. So if they haven't done anything yet, then you shouldn't do anything. If you think they are planning on attacking, you can talk to them and try to resolve issuses first, not just attack them first.

What I see this meme is stating is that just using reasoning like "peace" and "protection" to attack someone first is not very peaceful. There are other actions that can be taken first to try and keep the peace, but preemptive strikes is not one of them.

Look dude, I'm not confusing or misunderstanding anything on this. I clearly stated that self defense is a war for peace. That's simple to understand.

I said the whole 9/11 thing, not a specific country, so I don't know how you misinterpreted my comment so badly, but you have.

And Afghanistan was for resources as well. Lithium. Think of all the smart phones/devices needing lithium-ion batteries we made since 2001.

*sighs. A war can be in self defense. I get that your Quaker views don't believe that, but Quakers aren't the entire body politic, are they?

I'm a theist, but I don't follow the Bible 100%, being a sinner that's impossible. So don't fear losing salvation for fighting in self defense.

The meme though is oversimplifying war by comparing it to sex. So yeah, the meme got it wrong. It sounds funny, but it's not logically sound.

And a preemptive strike is a way to keep peace. If we knew that Japan was going to drop a nuke on us now in retaliation for 1945, we would stop them as best we could. And the act would be righteous self defense. How can you not see that?

If you knew I was going to attack you at a specific time with a weapon you had no defense against, you'd try to stop me or the weapon beforehand. That's logic. And most definitely self defense.

You're also making it seem like you mean people who claim peace when fighting in self defense. That isn't what I'm stating. I'm talking about when it is actual self defense by definition. Not when one says they're defending themselves so they can go steal a country's resources or land.

The definition of self defense is the defense of one's person or interests, especially through the use of physical force, which is permitted in certain cases as an answer to a charge of violent crime. The country one lives in would be considered an individual's interests. It's that simple dude. :l

No you took it to a first grade level when you started insulting my religious beliefs. It is not my fault that you cannot understand the simplicity of what I just showed you that this meme is stating. That is all on you. You cannot truly achieve peace by using violence because someone is always going to seek retaliation for your actions and therefor it creates a non-ending cycle of violence with no peace. If we went back to your example about you planning on attacking me, if I was to kill you first, I might have achieved peace but only for a limited time. One day one of your siblings or parents would want to seek vengeance in retaliation because they didn't see what I did as self defense to attempt peace. So if one of them was to then kill me, there goes peace once again, but would come back until one of my family members seeks retaliation, all until it blows out to a non-stop battle with people choosing one side or the other, until 1 side is completely annihilated. And so maybe 100 years from now peace is achieved, but at what cost? Would you get to see it? Would I? No. Now if I was to find out why it is that you are wanting to attack me with that weapon, then maybe a peaceful solution can be found. But the use of violence will never bring peace, only more violence.

Just because you cannot understand this, that is not my fault, that is all on you. So no I am not the one who is wrong here. It is you that cannot understand the simplicity of this meme and what it is really trying to say and who it is logically correct.

When did I EVER insult your religious beliefs?

And look at how badly you've flipped out? All because you're wrong and can't admit it.

The meme is equating war to sex. They're two completely different actions. You SHOULD be able to understand that, but for whatever reason don't. And I've already proven that a person can fight for peace and it not be a lie/misconception.

You lost the argument. Get over it. I didn't dv ANY of your comments. I also didn't mock your religion at any point. So the victim card was pointless dude.

I also suggest you give Art of War a read through at some point. It's not long and it will help you better understand this topic. :l

"No it isn't. " Boy did I see that answer coming.
"Stating that I don't understand this meme because of my religious views is an insult towards my religion. Just because you claim it is not does not make it so."

"That is in no way an insult. If you took it that way, it's on YOU. And it would mean that you're being too sensitive. " You were clearly stating that I cannot understand something because of my religious views. That is an insult towards me and my religion. That is not me being too sensitive. And just like I have typically seen from you, you don't even bother apologizing when someone takes personal offense to something you stated, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a virus to this site that should be avoided and eliminated.

You want an example of when you were proven wrong? I only need one.

On the meme https://imgflip.com/i/svsiw

You stated, "Actually the definition of cross wind is wind blowing across your direction of travel." This is false. TimeToLive was correct when they stated "Cross winds only occur, per definition, on landing or take off, so you probably mean wind shear."

The actual definition of cross wind is "In aviation, a crosswind is the component of wind that is blowing across the runway, making landings and take-offs more difficult than if the wind were blowing straight down the runway. If a crosswind is strong enough, it can damage an aircraft's undercarriage upon landing." Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosswind

You can also get the definition of wind shear when it comes to aviation by going to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_shear " is a difference in wind speed or direction over a relatively short distance in the atmosphere. Atmospheric wind shear is normally described as either vertical or horizontal wind shear. Vertical wind shear is a change in wind speed or direction at different altitudes. Horizontal wind shear is a change in wind speed between fixed points on the ground at any given altitude."

So yes you claim to be right even though you are proven wrong.

"If I'm fighting to restore peace, I am literally and by definition fighting FOR peace. It doesn't matter what happens afterwards or if I don't succeed or do. I was still fighting FOR peace" Then by your standards if I go out seeking to have sex with people and state I am doing it "FOR my virginity" then even if I do have sex then I was still doing it to keep my virginity. That makes completely logical sense. NOT.