The smackdown.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Oh ok. So if you're asking me: "Do you think Prime can win a fight between Kong (provided that Prime can keep all his weapons
Which is a given per the OP’s lack of disarming Prime of armaments built into his body. Exactly what gives you the right to arbitrarily alter the thread’s parameters?
and Kong is the smallest weakest Kong portrayed)
Learn to read better: I pointed out that Prime would win against any remotely grounded incarnation of Kong if he gets his firearms. You, yet again, ignore my argument and instead pose a ridiculous strawman distortion at your convenience.
if Kong is unarmed,
😆 Of course he’s unarmed…
and possibly drugged to eliminate any fast agile movement/aggressive countering actions?"
…are you full of shit?
Your continued insistence that Kong can evade supersonic projectile weaponry through “fast agile movement” extends beyond wank – it delves into literal delusion.
That Kong, even at the absolute fastest that we him, could possibly defeat a being pointing a modern+ projectile weapon at his ass has to be the one of the most retarded arguments in the board’s history.
Like, just, no.
Never mind the fact that you’ve yet failed to produce any empirical evidence of Kong’s being able to move his entire body faster than Prime can move his arm. There’s a reason why you don’t f*ck with guns.
I missed an apostrophe.
You were Prime/Tfs wanking, and misspelt 'Decepticon'.
ROFLAMO are your bringing in a contention completely unrelated to this specific point to pad your ridiculously weak argument.
You learn the difference between “its” and “it’s” in primary school. Did you learn how to spell “Decepticon” in primary school? Do you honestly believe remembering how to spell a fictional proper noun is more important than one of the fundamental rules in the English language?
Never mind that neither mistake has any relevance to the validity of our respective contentions – you brought it up, presumably, to sound intelligent. It didn’t work.
(You also noted that you don't value the correct spelling of a name that is fictional
Strawman distortion. Please show me where I say this.
So let’s compile your utter failures into a concise list:
1. You insist on altering the OP’s parameters to arbitrarily strip Optimus Prime of weapons built into his body and character.
2. You delude yourself into asserting, without any evidence whatsoever, that King Kong has sufficient agility to charge an opponent armed with repeating projectile weaponry and win.
3. You insist that tanking modern missiles and depleted uranium tank rounds are not impressive durability feats.
4. You laughably shift your position on multiple occasions, flip flopping between different versions of Kong and various thread parameters at your convenience.
5. You create various imaginary strawman positions, then attack them to conceal your utter failure at actually addressing the primary contentions of the debate.
Checkmate.