PDA

View Full Version : India: the USA should go on a diet




Antonius Stone
05-14-2008, 12:20 AM
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/13/business/food.php?page=1

bwahahahahahaha!

I don't mean to sound "un patriotic", but I think truer words have never been spoken.

Kotin
05-14-2008, 12:21 AM
Gotta love those Indians.

Kludge
05-14-2008, 12:27 AM
"The money Americans spend on liposuction to get rid of their excess fat could be funneled to famine victims instead, he added."

lol....

Mongoose470
05-14-2008, 12:48 AM
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/13/business/food.php?page=1

bwahahahahahaha!

I don't mean to sound "un patriotic", but I think truer words have never been spoken.

Absolutely. America has the highest rate of obesity among its female population and obesity is the single biggest turnoff for men (except in America where anything with a vagina gets laid.) Therefore America has the highest percentage of unattractive women. A nation of size fifteens who shop at the Baby GAP and grease themselves into size ones. Women that believe femininity is a disease to be treated with bad tatoos, slothfulness, dumpster casual men's clothing, foul language, snapping turtle personality, gutterslut morality and twelve boxes of twinkies.

The same could be said for American men. Men who think their machismo is wrapped below their ever bursting beer gutted girth. "I'm a real BIG man baby!" Men who think their machismo is determined by tatoos of beheaded babies, scarred knuckles and their aggregate child support liability. Men who rarely bathe and never brush their tooth. Weakminded, sex motivated, slobbish primates who believe machismo lacks in anything under a .20 BAC. Men with such low self respect and dignity that they would screw anything the rather massive center of gravity of our female population shows them. Men who at the age of fifty are still dominated by the adolescent instincts of boozing and broading and fighting.

smartguy911
05-14-2008, 12:54 AM
Absolutely. America has the highest rate of obesity among its female population and obesity is the single biggest turnoff for men (except in America where anything with a vagina gets laid.) Therefore America has the highest percentage of unattractive women. A nation of size fifteens who shop at the Baby GAP and grease themselves into size ones. Women that believe femininity is a disease to be treated with bad tatoos, slothfulness, dumpster casual men's clothing, foul language, snapping turtle personality, gutterslut morality and twelve boxes of twinkies.

The same could be said for American men. Men who think their machismo is wrapped below their ever bursting beer gutted girth. "I'm a real BIG man baby!" Men who think their machismo is determined by tatoos of beheaded babies and scarred knuckles. Men who rarely bathe and never brush their tooth. Weakminded, sex motivated, slobbish primates who believe machismo lacks in anything under a .20 BAC. Men with such low self respect and dignity that they would screw anything the rather massive center of gravity of our female population shows them. Men who at the age of fifty are still dominated by the adolescent instincts of boozing and broading and fighting.

i like chunky women...i prefer my girl to have some meat on her..skinny is a hugeeeeee turn offf

Mongoose470
05-14-2008, 12:57 AM
That depends on what you mean by chunky. In relation to the minority of anorexic endo skeletons consisting of 41 year old women and skanky Vanna wannabes still pining for the attention of their teen years (and pedophiles,) then yes.

Antonius Stone
05-14-2008, 01:45 AM
i like chunky women...i prefer my girl to have some meat on her..skinny is a hugeeeeee turn offf

i agree. While extremes in either direction (skinny or fat) is very unattractive, i think that the "ideal" for feminine beauty definitely has more meat on it than what the MSM tends to pushe as "beautiful" (anorexic supermodels). Real women have curves--thick is not fat.

That said, Americans should stop eating so many animal products. FFS, that's what causes most of the problems. And yeah, i'm a vegetarian, but I'm no animal rights activist--Its about health :cool:

that and the article wasn't lying when it said that Beef is the most energy-intensive foodstuff used for human consumption.

LiveFree79
05-14-2008, 02:02 AM
i agree. While extremes in either direction (skinny or fat) is very unattractive, i think that the "ideal" for feminine beauty definitely has more meat on it than what the MSM tends to pushe as "beautiful" (anorexic supermodels). Real women have curves--thick is not fat.

That said, Americans should stop eating so many animal products. FFS, that's what causes most of the problems. And yeah, i'm a vegetarian, but I'm no animal rights activist--Its about health :cool:

that and the article wasn't lying when it said that Beef is the most energy-intensive foodstuff used for human consumption.

Typical vegetarian ignorance. You have no clue what you are talking about. People can live off animal products. They can't live off vegetables alone. Fat soluble vitamins (which are not found in vegetables in any significant amounts) are the keys to health and vitality. Study the Masai in Africa, the Polynesians, the Aborgines, the Eskimo and every other indigenous culture in the history of the world.....and you'll see that before white man's diet of sugar and processed carbs populations didn't suffer any of the ill health effects such as heart disease, depression, arthritis, tooth decay etc.

I'll give you a perfect example.......raw milk from a certified raw dairy such as www.organicpastures.com is by far THE MOST NUTRITIOUS food you can put in your body. Red meat especially in it's raw state is much more nutritious than any damn vegetable. It's loaded with B vitamins, specifically 12, in which a lot of veggie freaks are deficient in, creatine, iron, enzymes, great raw saturated fat (despite the diet nazis cholesterol and fat are wonderful for the human body). The problem is we've tinkered and tampered our food so much, and even the ground and environment it is grown in, the animals that produce it......it's scary. We are a nation of "dead" food eaters and germaphobes in which everything is nuked, cooked, and zapped to death. Sorry but I'll take my fucking beef (raw) and milk (raw) and eggs (raw) over fucking rice. Indians are skinny pussies :)

Antonius Stone
05-14-2008, 05:14 AM
You're right, you can't live off vegetables alone, and anyone who tells you is pretty damn stupid. That's why you eat lots of fruits. And I drink raw milk too.

Also, there's a lot of holes in your argument. This assertion that fat-soluble vitamins are not found in vegetables seems pretty idiotic when one does a simple search on the nutritional content of spinach. Vitamin D is very high in mushrooms, which--dammit, i know--isn't a vegetable. I eat them anyways.

that said, my point is that the typical american diet has too many animal products--not that animal products should be eliminated entirely. Take a look at the typical american staple, the cheeseburger.

what's on a cheeseburger? Two loaves of white bread, meat, cheese, (sometimes) bacon, iceberg lettuce, tomato, onions, mayo, ketchup. Take into account the fact that lettuce has NO nutritional value (its costs your body more to digest it than it actually gets out of it; same is true of celery) and the fact that the vegetable servings on the cheeseburger are so damn tiny compared to the meat servings, and you have a microcosm for the typical american diet--60-80% animal products. If you really think that that kind of diet is healthy, well, you might be right--if you're a masai or indigenous polynesian.

Unlike the typical american, polynesians and masai and all the other indigenous peoples you mentioned have a very high standard of fitness. Their lifestyle necessitates fitness, unlike the American lifestyle where fitness is simply a status symbol. Saturated animal fats are good if you work them off. Americans don't tend to do that. To further the point, the masai don't just eat lots of meat and drink lots of milk, they actually hunt it down, herd the cattle themselves, sweat through the African summer, and so on and so on. Their level of fitness has been described as "olympic standard"--can the average american, with their lifestyle, job expectations and other commitments even aspire to an "olympic standard" of fitness?

And yes, a piece of meat has way more energy/nutrients than vegetables, that can't be contested. I mean think about the cheeseburger again--the slice of meat on there is one serving of meat, but one serving of tomato is a whole tomato--way more than you can actually fit on the hamburger. And that's why most hunter-gatherers, like the masai, polynesians, etc etc, relied so heavily on meat in the first place. One piece of meat has far more nutrients than the vegetables and fruits you can scavenge (few and far between) and by running back and forth after animals (or with your herd of cattle) you burn off the negative effects of saturated fat.

Now, with post agricultural revolution technology, the same is not true. Say you need to eat 20 fruits and vegetables to equal that one piece of meat--well, guess what, it now costs you far less energy to grow 50000 fruits and vegetables than to produce that one piece of meat (a hyper exaggeration, I know, but the point still stands). And vegetables have nutrients you can't get out of meat, specifically, dietary fiber, vitamins and minerals. As for Iron--have you ever heard of hummus or chickpeas?

and yes, if the "diet nazis" think fats and cholesterol are bad for you then indeed they are dumb. But last time I checked, Coconuts, Avocado and Hemp, all of which are high in fats, tend to be staples in most vegetarian diets, including mine. "Mediterranean diets"--which replace most of the saturated fats in american diets with unsaturated fats from olives/olive oil (avocado is also a source of this) have significantly less outbreaks of heart disease.
Hemp also has all the proteins you'd ever need.

Concerning vitamin B12:

Vitamin B12 is needed for cell division and blood formation. Neither plants nor animals make vitamin B12. Bacteria are responsible for producing vitamin B12. Animals get their vitamin B12 from eating foods contaminated with vitamin B12 and then the animal becomes a source of vitamin B12. Plant foods do not contain vitamin B12 except when they are contaminated by microorganisms or have vitamin B12 added to them. Thus, vegans need to look to fortified foods or supplements to get vitamin B12 in their diet. Although recommendations for vitamin B12 are very small, a vitamin B12 deficiency is a very serious problem leading ultimately to anemia and irreversible nerve damage.

There's a process called "biological magnification"--certain things just move up the food chain until they're very concentrated in an animal that is very high in the order. That's how we get B12.
Another example of this is the amount of mercury in fish. Mercury never leaves the tiny fish once it consumes the stuff, so the big swordfish at the top of the food chain, which eats all the little fish, has the most concentration of mercury. thats the main reason why seafood tends to be avoided. I'd like to see you justify eating mercury.

Anyways, you can get B12 directly from its microorganism producer: nutritional yeast.

with all that said, you're right about a lot of stuff--many of the problems comes from processed food (where all the trans fat comes from), all the additives and hormones they give the animals and the oversterilization of food. But most of these problems have been put on animal products. Cows are the ones that have been treated with excessive amounts of hormones. Spinach isn't pasteurized. Fruits don't get processed--they're just picked from the trees and sent to market.

I can understand if you disagree with me, but please, spare the crass, insulting bullshit.

silentboom
05-14-2008, 06:40 AM
They don't automatically have the right to something any more than the government has the right to take things from us. This is a terribly dangerous argument being brought up and we can't take the bait. Like Dr. Paul says, if the free markets were functioning properly we would not have these problems, there would be a more even distribution. If people want to voluntarily contribute money to this cause that's fine, but in a day and age of taxation and government intervention, who is going to willingly give up more money. There's only one fair way and that's the free market. This open the door to taxes on food and forced redistribution. To see some of you supporting it is disgusting and counter productive and from Ron Paul supporters I'm shocked. This will not work any more than the welfare system does. Have we not been down this path already.

Antonius Stone
05-14-2008, 11:43 AM
They don't automatically have the right to something any more than the government has the right to take things from us. This is a terribly dangerous argument being brought up and we can't take the bait. Like Dr. Paul says, if the free markets were functioning properly we would not have these problems, there would be a more even distribution. If people want to voluntarily contribute money to this cause that's fine, but in a day and age of taxation and government intervention, who is going to willingly give up more money. There's only one fair way and that's the free market. This open the door to taxes on food and forced redistribution. To see some of you supporting it is disgusting and counter productive and from Ron Paul supporters I'm shocked. This will not work any more than the welfare system does. Have we not been down this path already.

well thats the whole point of what's going on. This is the free market working--because of rising wages in India, they can buy and eat more food than they did before (which is still much less than we eat here) and that's part of the reason why food prices have gone up--increased demand.

The Indians' point is that its not fair for us to blame them for eating more food and driving up the prices when they (still) eat so much less than we do. And I think the point is legitimate.

Does that mean that I think the government should intervene and put us all on diets? No. I just think people should take the responsibility and go on a responsible diet instead of complaining about higher food prices. And if they don't do so voluntarily, the rising prices due to increases in energy costs and inflation will continue to do so shortly.

IRO-bot
05-14-2008, 12:19 PM
Mongoose470, I find women with tattoos delicious. Especialy traditional sailor jerry style. *drool*.

I am not macho or anything else you described. I am actually a pretty big nerd, but I have my entire chest tattoed. Stereotypes aren't cool.

CurtisLow
05-14-2008, 01:58 PM
Fat.. It's the damn hormones they put in our meat, milk, Cheese and all the other chemicals they drop in our food supply.


News story:
The Bush administration on Friday asked a federal appeals court to stop meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease, USA Today reports.

A low court ruled early that Kansas-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef can conduct mad cow disease testing in all animals. The company pursues the testing to meet the demand from foreign markets like Japan, which requires the testing for every domestic cow.

But the United States Department of Agriculture strongly opposed such a testing saying meatpackers have no right to such a testing. And it also said such a testing would undermine consumers’ confidence in domestic beef safety.

http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/L_aws_amp_P_olitics_42/051303372008_Government_fighting_to_stop_private_m ad_cow_testing_printer.shtml

CurtisLow
05-14-2008, 02:06 PM
/// D'oh!

Mckarnin
05-14-2008, 02:20 PM
i agree. While extremes in either direction (skinny or fat) is very unattractive, i think that the "ideal" for feminine beauty definitely has more meat on it than what the MSM tends to pushe as "beautiful" (anorexic supermodels). Real women have curves--thick is not fat.

That said, Americans should stop eating so many animal products. FFS, that's what causes most of the problems. And yeah, i'm a vegetarian, but I'm no animal rights activist--Its about health :cool:

that and the article wasn't lying when it said that Beef is the most energy-intensive foodstuff used for human consumption.

Beef is not that high energy of a food when the cows graze on land instead of being cooped up and being fed pesticide laden grain. I am working on buying a chest freezer so I can get local grass-fed beef. Several grass fed ranches have deals going with local orchards, Christmas tree farm owners, etc...where their cattle graze the land for the business owners and keep the grass short....thus the land is being used twice.

torchbearer
05-14-2008, 02:23 PM
Will India sell us cheap Phentermine?

angelatc
05-14-2008, 02:23 PM
Absolutely. America has the highest rate of obesity among its female population and obesity is the single biggest turnoff for men... .

Blah blah blah. Any woman worth a fuck would not give a rat's ass about what turns men off.

Besides, it's all trendy anyway. During the Renaissance period, large women were all the rage.

autobot
05-14-2008, 02:47 PM
"Americans eat an average of 3,770 calories per capita a day"

LOL, I can't believe this!!! Outrageous. 3770...OMG!! I feel so dainty now.

If I eat more than 1300 a day I get fat. And I am pretty active. That is a crazy amount of food.

3770 is like 5 big macs a soda and a large fry!! LOL

Ozwest
05-14-2008, 02:56 PM
Cooking your own food is good.

My favorite food is Indian.

I eat it at least 3 times a week, and it's always rice based.

Somebody's sneaking a cheeseburger.

Cowlesy
05-14-2008, 03:24 PM
I think before India starts trash talking they should consider getting off the caste system (they say they're off but it's still there).

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3798

Kludge
05-14-2008, 03:28 PM
I think before India starts trash talking they should consider getting off the caste system (they say they're off but it's still there).

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3798

http://www.pdxlan.net/forums/images/smiles/offtopic.jpg

Ozwest
05-14-2008, 03:29 PM
I think before India starts trash talking they should consider getting off the caste system (they say they're off but it's still there).

http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3798There goes that perfect combination of Indian food and slavery.

You are a killjoy Cowlesy!

LiveFree79
05-14-2008, 10:55 PM
You're right, you can't live off vegetables alone, and anyone who tells you is pretty damn stupid. That's why you eat lots of fruits. And I drink raw milk too.

Also, there's a lot of holes in your argument. This assertion that fat-soluble vitamins are not found in vegetables seems pretty idiotic when one does a simple search on the nutritional content of spinach. Vitamin D is very high in mushrooms, which--dammit, i know--isn't a vegetable. I eat them anyways.

that said, my point is that the typical american diet has too many animal products--not that animal products should be eliminated entirely. Take a look at the typical american staple, the cheeseburger.

what's on a cheeseburger? Two loaves of white bread, meat, cheese, (sometimes) bacon, iceberg lettuce, tomato, onions, mayo, ketchup. Take into account the fact that lettuce has NO nutritional value (its costs your body more to digest it than it actually gets out of it; same is true of celery) and the fact that the vegetable servings on the cheeseburger are so damn tiny compared to the meat servings, and you have a microcosm for the typical american diet--60-80% animal products. If you really think that that kind of diet is healthy, well, you might be right--if you're a masai or indigenous polynesian.

Unlike the typical american, polynesians and masai and all the other indigenous peoples you mentioned have a very high standard of fitness. Their lifestyle necessitates fitness, unlike the American lifestyle where fitness is simply a status symbol. Saturated animal fats are good if you work them off. Americans don't tend to do that. To further the point, the masai don't just eat lots of meat and drink lots of milk, they actually hunt it down, herd the cattle themselves, sweat through the African summer, and so on and so on. Their level of fitness has been described as "olympic standard"--can the average american, with their lifestyle, job expectations and other commitments even aspire to an "olympic standard" of fitness?

And yes, a piece of meat has way more energy/nutrients than vegetables, that can't be contested. I mean think about the cheeseburger again--the slice of meat on there is one serving of meat, but one serving of tomato is a whole tomato--way more than you can actually fit on the hamburger. And that's why most hunter-gatherers, like the masai, polynesians, etc etc, relied so heavily on meat in the first place. One piece of meat has far more nutrients than the vegetables and fruits you can scavenge (few and far between) and by running back and forth after animals (or with your herd of cattle) you burn off the negative effects of saturated fat.

Now, with post agricultural revolution technology, the same is not true. Say you need to eat 20 fruits and vegetables to equal that one piece of meat--well, guess what, it now costs you far less energy to grow 50000 fruits and vegetables than to produce that one piece of meat (a hyper exaggeration, I know, but the point still stands). And vegetables have nutrients you can't get out of meat, specifically, dietary fiber, vitamins and minerals. As for Iron--have you ever heard of hummus or chickpeas?

and yes, if the "diet nazis" think fats and cholesterol are bad for you then indeed they are dumb. But last time I checked, Coconuts, Avocado and Hemp, all of which are high in fats, tend to be staples in most vegetarian diets, including mine. "Mediterranean diets"--which replace most of the saturated fats in american diets with unsaturated fats from olives/olive oil (avocado is also a source of this) have significantly less outbreaks of heart disease.
Hemp also has all the proteins you'd ever need.

Concerning vitamin B12:


There's a process called "biological magnification"--certain things just move up the food chain until they're very concentrated in an animal that is very high in the order. That's how we get B12.
Another example of this is the amount of mercury in fish. Mercury never leaves the tiny fish once it consumes the stuff, so the big swordfish at the top of the food chain, which eats all the little fish, has the most concentration of mercury. thats the main reason why seafood tends to be avoided. I'd like to see you justify eating mercury.

Anyways, you can get B12 directly from its microorganism producer: nutritional yeast.

with all that said, you're right about a lot of stuff--many of the problems comes from processed food (where all the trans fat comes from), all the additives and hormones they give the animals and the oversterilization of food. But most of these problems have been put on animal products. Cows are the ones that have been treated with excessive amounts of hormones. Spinach isn't pasteurized. Fruits don't get processed--they're just picked from the trees and sent to market.

I can understand if you disagree with me, but please, spare the crass, insulting bullshit.

First off if you had a basic understanding of nutrition you'd understand that fat soluble vitamins found in vegetables are not the same as those found in animal products. Vitamin A and it's derivatives are a perfect example. Vitamin A found in carrots (beta carotene) is not the same nor is it utilitzed the same by the human body as the Vitamin A found in animal products. Again I suggest you look at the website www.westonaprice.org Moreover, your point is wrong. It's not that the American diet has too many animal products. This is in fact not backed up by facts or common sense. In fact Americans overrall are and have been eating much less fat than they did 50 years ago. In fact most of the "fat" in food (most processed) is mono, polyunsaturated vegetables oils. Saturated fat consumption has declined immensely in this country. If you study the history of nutrition in America and correlate that with the prevalence of heart disease there is a negative association. Heart disease has actually been going up dramatically for the last 100 years while our intake of saturated fat has declined significantly and our vegetable oil consumption has skyrocketed.

You keep using the cheeseburger as an example. Well let's take the cheeseburger for example. Beef from a grass fed cow is one of the healthiest things you can put into your body. If it's raw it's even better. What has happened to our beef thanks to cattle being grazed on corn and grains instead of grass is that it has become much higher in saturated fat and the CLA content has gone way down. A cheeseburger that is cooked most often well done is a bad argument against beef. Raw beef is amazingly healthy and I'd eat it day in and day out over any vegetable. Avacados and coconuts are very healthy. LOL But again do you not realize that most of the "fat" in coconuts are saturated? The body needs saturated fat much more than it does mono/polyunsaturated.

And your analysis on the Masai is true.

Anyways, I suggest you research Weston A. Price and visit the website www.wewant2live.com before you decide to live your life as a vegetarian.......by the way you should add lacto/ovo or whatever before you throw out the term "vegetarian". There is a BIG difference in my opinion. I'd also suggest you read the book the Cholesterol Myths by Uffe Ravenskov to see where most of you veggies get your info.

Nirvikalpa
05-15-2008, 09:25 AM
Blah blah blah. Any woman worth a fuck would not give a rat's ass about what turns men off.

Besides, it's all trendy anyway. During the Renaissance period, large women were all the rage.

QFT

:D:D:D

A couple of comments.

Explain to me why there are size 8 and 10 pants in the plus size section? A size 8 and 10, IMHO, is no where near plus size - it's healthy.



* 58% of men aged 20-34 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 67.6% of men aged 35-44 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 71.3% of men aged 45-54 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 72.5% of men aged 55-64 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 77.2% of men aged 65-74 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 66.4% of men aged over 75 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)

# Overweight prevalence statistics for women in the USA:

* 51.5% of women aged 20-34 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 63.6% of women aged 35-44 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 64.7% of women aged 45-54 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 73.1% of women aged 55-64 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 70.1% of women aged 65-74 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)
* 59.6% of women aged over 75 are overweight in the US 1999-2000 (Health United States, 2003, NCHS)

It's either the numbers are close (.5%) or men beat us in being overweight every time. But take a closer look at these statistics, and think about the reason behind them (with regard to age and sex).

Anyway, physically, the models you tend to see everyday on TV are drastically unhealthy - a woman should have 10% of her body weight focused on her hips and thighs, and should have a 'significant' difference in waist to hip ratio. http://www.healthcalculators.org/calculators/waist_hip.asp (.7 are what men find most appealing).


life expectancy:
139 India 64.7 63.2 66.4
38 United States 78.2 75.6 80.8

silentboom
05-15-2008, 02:19 PM
well thats the whole point of what's going on. This is the free market working--because of rising wages in India, they can buy and eat more food than they did before (which is still much less than we eat here) and that's part of the reason why food prices have gone up--increased demand.

The Indians' point is that its not fair for us to blame them for eating more food and driving up the prices when they (still) eat so much less than we do. And I think the point is legitimate.

Does that mean that I think the government should intervene and put us all on diets? No. I just think people should take the responsibility and go on a responsible diet instead of complaining about higher food prices. And if they don't do so voluntarily, the rising prices due to increases in energy costs and inflation will continue to do so shortly.

Well it's possible that our government is causing this through subsidies to various food producers and ethanol. That's not the free market operating, that's the opposite. This seems to be the process ....cause the problem, criticize, then take control of it to make us all better. I want anything but governments intervening in anything. It's what the fed does, cause the bubble, blame the homeowner, criticize the lenders then take more control.

brandon
05-15-2008, 02:25 PM
Mongoose470, I find women with tattoos delicious. Especialy traditional sailor jerry style. *drool*.


ugh. There is no bigger turnoff then a tattoo on a woman. I dont think too highly of men with tattoos either, but I guess I am just a close minded judgemental fuck.


Oh yea, and Americans should lose some weight.

Uriel999
05-15-2008, 07:03 PM
Lets declare war on India, but lets develop special bombs that instead of big fiery explosions caused walmarts, Mcdonalds, taco bells and KFCs' to instantly pop up...Think about it...this would be the perfect chance to use premptive strikes on countries that piss us off, but it would build infastructure! India for instance needs to be carpet bombed with as many mcdonalds as possible so 5 to 10 years from now they are just as fat as us!

Then again, perhaps the power of the taco bell bomb is too much. Nobody can resist the power of the new bacon ranch chalupa!!!! mmmm chalupas....