Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Goodbye to the 2000's- The worst decade in a post WWII world.

John Fox

By John Fox,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Captroop Veteran

Captroop

Posted
Posted

Ok, so here's what I don't understand. They know the world is ending, so to prevent a panic, they keep it under wraps and build a handful of arks to save the few people who know about it. OK. But if the did tell everyone, couldn't they have built a shiz-ton of arks and saved almost everyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Epistaxis Newbie

Epistaxis

Posted
Posted

Really?

The 30's had the Great Depression.

The 40's had a monster war.

The 50's had the Cold War, Nuclear escalation, the Korean war and the birth of suburban hell :)

The 60's had hippies and Vietnam and the continuing cold war, and assassinations out the yang.

The 70's had Nixon, the birth of me, and disco

The 80's rocked. Don't go there.

The 90's. Ugh. I pretty much went in to an academic cloister for most of the 90's so I have no idea. But I'm pretty sure the music sucked. The economy was fun.

I think the worst decade stuff is a load of crap.

Even with the "post WWII" qualifier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sultan33g Newbie

Sultan33g

Posted
Posted

Ok, so here's what I don't understand. They know the world is ending, so to prevent a panic, they keep it under wraps and build a handful of arks to save the few people who know about it. OK. But if the did tell everyone, couldn't they have built a shiz-ton of arks and saved almost everyone?

thats a lot of arks...6 billion people? it would take a long time to build enough for that? and a lot are homeless, in prison..etc...they just want the rich billionaires on it..who knows...I know one thing...I dont think my savings is going to cover the 1billion dollar mark...but lets see if all of us huddlers might be able to put our monies together and see if we can do it!!...just give me all the money and I will make sure and keep it safe!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captroop Veteran

Captroop

Posted
Posted

Well obviously we don't save the prisoners, homeless, gingers, scientologists, terminally ill and others who can't or shouldn't perpetuate the species. That knocks it down to like 5 billion, right there. And we don't need to build an ark, per se. I bet if the Huddle pooled it's money together we could make a seaworthy vessel on a budget.

The S.S. Zod

economyboat.jpg

The S.S. Delhomme... which didn't fare as well

Sunken%20Ship.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sultan33g Newbie

Sultan33g

Posted
Posted

Well obviously we don't save the prisoners, homeless, gingers, scientologists, terminally ill and others who can't or shouldn't perpetuate the species. That knocks it down to like 5 billion, right there. And we don't need to build an ark, per se. I bet if the Huddle pooled it's money together we could make a seaworthy vessel on a budget.

The S.S. Zod

economyboat.jpg

The S.S. Delhomme... which didn't fare as well

Sunken%20Ship.JPG

I got shotgun on the Zod

.....that didnt sound right.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Link Newbie

The Link

Posted
Posted

Yep...and in this environment is where I hit adulthood; it can't be good for the human psyche when one of your most tangible memories is watching the Sept. 11 footage in sixth grade.

That's when I saw the footage as well. I was in sixth grade geography when I saw it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KillerKat Grand Master

KillerKat

Posted
Posted

Really?

The 30's had the Great Depression.

The 40's had a monster war.

The 50's had the Cold War, Nuclear escalation, the Korean war and the birth of suburban hell :)

The 60's had hippies and Vietnam and the continuing cold war, and assassinations out the yang.

The 70's had Nixon, the birth of me, and disco

The 80's rocked. Don't go there.

The 90's. Ugh. I pretty much went in to an academic cloister for most of the 90's so I have no idea. But I'm pretty sure the music sucked. The economy was fun.

I think the worst decade stuff is a load of crap.

Even with the "post WWII" qualifier.

The teens: WW1, the Titantic, giving women the right to vote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jessicasmith0
      Does JetBlue have free cancellation?

      By jessicasmith0 · Posted

      https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP https://support.google.com/assistant/thread/311339676?hl=en&sjid=11489775381582229063-AP
    • tukafan21
      Mason Graham Bandwagon

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • Carolina Mike
      Mason Graham Bandwagon

      By Carolina Mike · Posted

      This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
×
×
  • Create New...