oops...and then there's Cleopatra...

and Deborah

and Esther....


oh, please, make me stop, my fingers are getting tired.

Ahh Valhall I was hoping you'd bring up one of the worst Combat tacticians the world has ever seen.

Joan of Arc! HAH!

God...she was the best the french had (as a joke obviously not true), but her actual tactics were very...very flawed.

Also, she was a virgin...and what...18?

Maybe even younger.

Hardly the type for the presidency, nor the type that will have become emotionally attached to either men...or become emotional at all.

Her career was also very limited.


Ahh Cleopatra...yeah she'd have been a good leader, if she hadn't killed her Father, her brother, her uncle, her aunt...and her cousins....

And she didn't kill them "just for the throne"...she hated most of them.

PS and she used her unmentionables to make deals with Rome....can't have that going on as president now can we...

Please make me stop...flaws in men consist of judgement.

Flaws in women consist of emotions.

The latter is the worst of the two in politics.

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by FreeMason]

Actually she was around 14...and let's just see if you accomplish as much when you get to that age.

I'll be watching, FM.

P.S. I'm sure a great example of how the male president is superior would be to bring up how Clinton used his unmentionables for... I'm sorry, what was the national gain for that??? I can't remember...

hmmm...seems women "whip out the unmentionables" for far more greater causes, doesn't it?

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by Valhall]

First the government has to be taken back.

I want to use a prior ATS saying here.

TAKE BACK THE USA!
As of the last few centuries, our national leader/s have been nothing but glorified puppets, figureheads. Sure our President has some power, but nothing compared to early presidents. The system was set up so too much power would stay out of the governements hands, and in the hands of the people. It is not where it's sposed to be. And it is only going to be harder to get back if nothing is done. So far, Congress made the right move, lets see what unfolds next.

Actually Valhall I would have made a better hand-to-hand combatant than Joan, who had no training with a sword...and could barely lift a claymore let alone a flamberge.

Her skill consisted of "Hey she's a woman, we can't lose now cause we've never done something so stupid before."

And that heightend "courage" allowed the men to victory, then after a few crap attempts at some flawed seiges, they lost faith and tossed her on her bum...where she belonged.

[Edited on 17-7-2003 by FreeMason]

yoohoo...hey, nutless...I edited my post above


trying to envision (with a fair amount of pain) that FM has ever had anything more deadly than his own...


excuse me, were we talking about unmentionables???

in his hand.

Go Valhall!

I knew this would be a good battle
Best part is I already know the outcome as well.

< unfolds the lawn chair

racist crap doesnt belong on ats

?

racist crap doesnt belong on ats

Where did that come from?

you assume that PMS is a negative thing....
we bleed for a very good reason
to produce life

if anything, it makes us more tolerant to
pain...which there is plenty of in this world

i would rather have a PMS ridden female president over a testosteron penis driven male leader anyday

men think with their shlongs 90% of the time anyway
who would you trust:

a prez who gets head from his secretary or a female on the rag ready to take on anything that gets in her way

if he has the nerve to cheat on his wife, he lacks in all aspects of being trustworthy...but then again, hes just being the man that god made him.

and who really leads this country anyway, its all a facade.

So far I liked best the mentioning of unmentionables.

Also, it can be mapped out as an interesting quadrant (male, female, left wing, right wing) of which one quadrant is not represented (left wing women), in which case in the gender war it could prove to be the women's undoing in a moment, unless the women give the bout to FreeMason in support of the Bush cause.

can you explain yourself, fry ?

I am formally against sharing discussion boards with racists, do you have a problem with that ?

As a historical note:

Cleopatra lost. Really, any reading of history shows that she was totally played-out by the Romans... Due to her foolishness, Egypt was annexed by the Romans.

Joan of Ark was known for commanding attacks against English fortifications that resulted in the loss of over 50% of her forces, at any given time... still, I commend her bravery.

...Just thought you guys might want to look for female leaders who were'nt losers.



PS I'm not taking FM's side, just responding to what you've mentioned already.

Thank you yet again dreams...

as for Clinton, we all know I think the guy should be hung, but he really hasn't done treason as the constitution defines it so that'll never happen

Again though, the "anger" and passion from the females here, is this how women are all the time...because of course by Valhall's opinion I haven't ever even seen one...

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
can you explain yourself, fry ?

I am formally against sharing discussion boards with racists, do you have a problem with that ?

Who or where did the racist comment come from?!
I for one would like to know. Please don't twist and turn things into a flameing contest, trouble will only be the victor.

I can see you are only trying to help, but REALLY stick to the subject...

FM is a man-god...he will save the universe. He may be the second coming.

now, on with the topic

Yes, Cleopatra's unmentionables may have led to the annexation of Egypt, but it also resulted in significantly less loss of life than a full military attack...

in addition, she got a most EXCELLENT roadtrip out of the deal, with 5 star accomodations, and managed to knock off SEVERAL Roman higher-ups...not a bad deal.

Joan of Arc, give her break. She was the only friggin Frenchman??? willing to do anything, you have to give her that 14 year old females probably WEREN'T studying military strategy...and does it speak more against her...or the spineless men who MAY have followed errant strategies???

Queens and the flags...haven't heard anything yet.

We resume the previous scheduled program.

[Edited on 19-7-2003 by Valhall]

can you explain yourself, fry ?

I am formally against sharing discussion boards with racists, do you have a problem with that ?

I am too, if not more than you. I was wondering what the statement had to do with the thread.
Did you mean sexism?

Well if the ESL moku is really meaning "sexist" i'm not that either.

I just have a more favorable view of women where they are treated with respect and not thrusted mercilessly into the competitive world....but women seem to think that's "male shovenism"...

Those same women never had good husbands.

They it/he/she must mean "Sexism", cause I saw nothing remotely racist typed.