Area 51 - The Frantic Caller
are you seriously going to sit there and tell me that america has done nothing for any third world country?
closed account (N36fSL3A)
No, that's not my point. My point was that a lot people think that they're better than everyone else (primarily in more fortunate countries), and because of their nationalistic ways, they react much more strongly (sometimes overreact) toward things that happen to them. When it doesn't, the reaction is much less severe, even if there was a greater foreign disaster.
| people think that they're better than everyone else |
| they react much more strongly (sometimes overreact) toward things that happen to them. When it doesn't, the reaction is much less severe |
Last edited on
Huh. Still find it great that we use terms like "first world" and "third world" without realization of what they mean.
First world implies countries that sided with the US in the Cold War.
Second world implies countries that sided with the USSR in the Cold War.
Third world implies countries that did not side with either.
Source: http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_countries.htm
So... yeah. Stop using those terms; they're dead.
Also, the US, last I checked, began imposing a significant amount of sanctions on Russia over the incident in Ukraine, helped out Kuwait... yeah, it hasn't done much. Mostly it just mucked in the affairs of Latin American countries, supporting rebels (Iran-Contra Affair) and pissing off everyone in its vicinity.
First world implies countries that sided with the US in the Cold War.
Second world implies countries that sided with the USSR in the Cold War.
Third world implies countries that did not side with either.
Source: http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_countries.htm
So... yeah. Stop using those terms; they're dead.
Also, the US, last I checked, began imposing a significant amount of sanctions on Russia over the incident in Ukraine, helped out Kuwait... yeah, it hasn't done much. Mostly it just mucked in the affairs of Latin American countries, supporting rebels (Iran-Contra Affair) and pissing off everyone in its vicinity.
@ Ispil:
It hasn't meant that since the end of the cold war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
@Fredbill:
You're wrong... this is not because of their nationalism. It has nothing to do with Americans thinking America is great and thinking other countries are worse. Those are all false assumptions.
You must have missed my previous reply where I explained this. I'll link it here:
http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/131004/5/#msg708583
It hasn't meant that since the end of the cold war.
| Wikipedia wrote: |
|---|
| and the end of the Cold War, the meaning "First World" took on a new meaning applicable to the times, coming to be largely synonymous with developed countries or highly developed countries (depending on which definition is intended). |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
@Fredbill:
| because of their nationalistic ways, they react much more strongly (sometimes overreact) toward things that happen to them. When it doesn't, the reaction is much less severe, even if there was a greater foreign disaster. |
You're wrong... this is not because of their nationalism. It has nothing to do with Americans thinking America is great and thinking other countries are worse. Those are all false assumptions.
You must have missed my previous reply where I explained this. I'll link it here:
http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/131004/5/#msg708583
Well, I cite... surprisingly pro-Russian website, and you cite Wikipedia, so we may never know the truth. But I digress.
Actually, looking at that site... I really don't know what the hell it is.
Actually, looking at that site... I really don't know what the hell it is.
Last edited on
Ispil:
It's used that way in modern pop culture as well. At least in the USA.
Have you ever head the phrase "first world problems"?
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/first-world-problems
It's used that way in modern pop culture as well. At least in the USA.
Have you ever head the phrase "first world problems"?
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/first-world-problems
Yes, I've heard the term. I just find it hilarious that people still use a Cold War term to describe something completely different.
| Ispil wrote: |
|---|
| Yes, I've heard the term. I just find it hilarious that people still use a Cold War term to describe something completely different. |
Yeah, that happens regularly. Tons of words used today used to mean something else.
closed account (z0My6Up4)
Disch wrote:
I just wanted to add that the bible says in Genesis 6:4 "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown."
It can be argued from this that 'they' aka aliens found earth long ago, if nephilim are aliens as some people suggest. This is possible evidence that they have visited in the past.
Again I have to go back to the mere size of the universe. And if you are opening up the parallel universe door... then there is literally an infinite amount of planets in an infinite amount of universes. How did the aliens find Earth in all of that? It'd be like searching for a grain of sand on a beach... only the beach is bigger than the entire planet. The odds of contact being made in this scenario is statistically impossible. |
I just wanted to add that the bible says in Genesis 6:4 "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown."
It can be argued from this that 'they' aka aliens found earth long ago, if nephilim are aliens as some people suggest. This is possible evidence that they have visited in the past.
Last edited on
@Disch
He wouldn't be a traditional conspiracy theorist if he didn't throw the Bible in there at some point. I mean come on, according to them you can find evidence of alien visitation throughout history based on glyphs and pottery found. I mean we all know that we are the only ones that had imagination to create fiction so the glyphs can only be factual and not telling a fictional story on the side of the temple (like the modern day murals on the side of buildings).
He wouldn't be a traditional conspiracy theorist if he didn't throw the Bible in there at some point. I mean come on, according to them you can find evidence of alien visitation throughout history based on glyphs and pottery found. I mean we all know that we are the only ones that had imagination to create fiction so the glyphs can only be factual and not telling a fictional story on the side of the temple (like the modern day murals on the side of buildings).
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.