View Full Version : The Indian Condom Crisis
Rentafence
May 30th, 2012, 01:38 PM
The BBC reports that a study performed by the Indian Council of Medical Research has found that condoms sized according to international standards are on average three to five centimeters too large for about 60% of Indian men. Discuss.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6161691.stm
Futzy
May 30th, 2012, 01:39 PM
ok
neuro
May 30th, 2012, 01:49 PM
:downs:
TVTyrant
May 30th, 2012, 01:55 PM
lol
DarkHalo003
May 30th, 2012, 02:12 PM
It's problem when they have the second highest population in the world. Overpopulation is the biggest environmental issue humanity faces, believe it or not. Another space race? :iamafag:
Limited
May 30th, 2012, 03:04 PM
2006 dude...two thousand and six.
Patrickssj6
May 30th, 2012, 07:09 PM
according to this (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lc3gQ7sgOf8/TZDWuqrOp2I/AAAAAAAAHC8/D_LMVJjfXaA/s1600/targetmap-penis-size-world-map.jpg), 3 to 5 centimeters would be too big for you as well
discuss
Rentafence
May 30th, 2012, 10:11 PM
2006 dude...two thousand and six.
It is the greatest problem of their time
FluffyDuckyâ„¢
May 30th, 2012, 10:50 PM
LOL
Bodzilla
May 30th, 2012, 11:56 PM
i dont have this problem, when i'm abuot to blow my load i actually stretch the largest condoms i can find
~feels good man~
Spartan094
May 31st, 2012, 12:10 AM
smashing news:nigel:
FluffyDuckyâ„¢
May 31st, 2012, 12:33 AM
wut..
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 01:35 AM
according to this (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lc3gQ7sgOf8/TZDWuqrOp2I/AAAAAAAAHC8/D_LMVJjfXaA/s1600/targetmap-penis-size-world-map.jpg), 3 to 5 centimeters would be too big for you as well
discuss
This looks like its probably the most skewed information reporting of all time. Worse than Soviet kill counts in WW2.
BTW, I can't fucking read it because its in CENTIMETERS. :iamafag:
neuro
May 31st, 2012, 02:27 AM
learn to use NON-RETARDED MEASUREMENTS
stupid dumbass non-metric-knowing-person-dumbass-jerk-guy!
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 02:48 AM
learn to use NON-RETARDED MEASUREMENTS
stupid dumbass non-metric-knowing-person-dumbass-jerk-guy!
Next time you're trying to figure out a measurement in the woods, tell me how useful metric is.
I agree its a much better system for modern times, and I wish we used it. But Imperial was great in it's day because anyone could use it at any time. Metric is all math and numbers that don't represent anything tangible. Its very scientific, and thus superior, but any sailor worth his salt used Imperial because it's more effective when you don't have time for that.
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 02:54 AM
This looks like its probably the most skewed information reporting of all time. Worse than Soviet kill counts in WW2.
BTW, I can't fucking read it because its in CENTIMETERS. :iamafag:
Or the German ones. "Let's award a kill to everyone involved in the downing of an aircraft, even if they only got two shots in!"
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 02:55 AM
Or the German ones. "Let's award a kill to everyone involved in the downing of an aircraft, even if they only got two shots in!"
Japanese ones are funny too. They claimed they killed a million Americans at Iwo Jima.
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 03:16 AM
I would be pretty fucking surprised if there wasn't a country that blew its kills out of all proportion in WWII. The only vaguely sure way to tell is to check out the other party's casualty records, and hope to fuck those are accurate. In the case of the Eastern Front, the German figures naturally confirm the logical conclusion that the Red Army did practically all the heavy lifting against Germany (from memory I think 80% of Wehrmacht casualties were there, I had the actual numbers in front of me once and it made the casualties to Britain, the US, and Free France look like a bad joke); the Soviet ones show what happens when you have the majority of your officers, including all the ones who actually understand modern warfare, either imprisoned or shot.
Shit, even the RAF blew its kills out of proportion, and the RAF was super fucking stingy about awarding credit for kills - possibly the most so. Credit was awarded in fractions, had to be confirmed, and recorded after each flight.
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 03:19 AM
The Soviets doing the heavy lifting thing always makes me laugh. Without strong allies they would have lost. Germany held all the economic cards.
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 03:39 AM
That doesn't change the fact that they did the overwhelming majority of the fighting, and suffed on a level that none of the Western Allies could even hope to understand. WWII was won by the Allies together - the US in the factories and by bankrolling the fight, the UK in halting the Germans where they were, and the Red Army in actually footing the human bill and pushing them all the way back into Germany.
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 03:48 AM
That doesn't change the fact that they did the overwhelming majority of the fighting, and suffed on a level that none of the Western Allies could even hope to understand. WWII was won by the Allies together - the US in the factories and by bankrolling the fight, the UK in halting the Germans where they were, and the Red Army in actually footing the human bill and pushing them all the way back into Germany.
Good thing they were so involved in the Pacific
Owai-
Now I'm just fucking around lol
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 04:06 AM
Actually, The Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation (while not strictly in the Pacific theatre) was the single most rapid military advance in recorded history, across some pretty unpleasant terrain and against the last well-equipped land army the IJA had (since they'd been sitting in Manchuria with their dicks in their hands for several years by that point). There's a fairly decent-sized school of thought that Japan's surrender was less to do with the fear of more nukes, and more to do with the fear of a Soviet invasion while the US dropped more nukes. The 1945 Red Army, coming off the morale high of crushing the Nazis, is not really something you would want to be on the wrong end of. They were still very much bitter over 1905, too, so Japan would've known what was coming their way. The Western Allies would be dubious about mounting an invasion because of the massive losses... the USSR would not hesitate for a moment.
Also, the Commonwealth nations did a shitload of hard work in the Pacific and CBI theatre. The first Japanese land defeat in the Pacific was served to them by Australian troops who then proceeded to push them out of PNG, the British did a lot of the heavy lifting in China-Burma-India, and let's not forget the American volunteers who fought for the Chinese against the Japanese before the US even entered the war.
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 04:12 AM
The Red Army hadn't made a single move against the Japs until May 1945.
Yeah, the war was on their doorstep, but that shows that they only got involved for the sake of conquest IMO.
And yes, the commonwealth were very good allies to us in the Pacific, as were we to them.
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 04:15 AM
Also, how the fuck did this come up ITT anyways?
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 04:22 AM
I think you mentioned something about skewed results and then used Soviet kill stats from WWII as an example.
Sorry, I... I just can't help myself. Military history is the best.
e/
The Red Army hadn't made a single move against the Japs until May 1945.
False; they fought them in Mongolia before WWII even began, serving them a bitter defeat at Khalkin Gol. That was the battle which elevated Georgiy Zhukov to fame.
Yeah, the war was on their doorstep, but that shows that they only got involved for the sake of conquest IMO.
You're essentially right here. Russia was still licking its wounds over the Russo-Japanese War and the 1905 defeat at Port Arthur, and with Russia being the largest constituent of the Soviet Union, the USSR inherited that bitterness. They had been at peace due to a treaty with Japan following Khalkin Gol, but with WWII clearly about to end and the Nazis no longer a threat, the USSR focused its full fury on the Japanese and in one fell swoop (I believe the entire MSOO was over in two weeks), crushed the Japanese forces in Manchuria, reclaiming their lost ground from 1905 and then some. They also reclaimed Sakhalin and the Kurils. It was definitely for the sake of conquest... but it was re-conquest, for the most part. Most of the area was later ceded to China (not many people know this, but many major cities in northern China used to be Russian).
TVTyrant
May 31st, 2012, 04:24 AM
I think you mentioned something about skewed results and then used Soviet kill stats from WWII as an example.
Sorry, I... I just can't help myself. Military history is the best.
fo sho
Rentafence
May 31st, 2012, 01:06 PM
Stop derailing my thread please Rossmum. This is about the Indian Condom Crisis not your cool aeroplanes.
rossmum
May 31st, 2012, 02:37 PM
shut up dad
Jelly
June 2nd, 2012, 09:39 PM
thanks for making a thread about my band rentafence but i fear it has beed derailed by trolls. fucker trills
TPBlinD
June 3rd, 2012, 01:16 PM
condoms need buff
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.