Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 10:50:25 am

Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 10:50:25 am
http://www.notinourname.net
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: an0n on September 28, 2002, 10:52:51 am
Old news.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Knight Templar on September 28, 2002, 11:39:40 am
wtf is this? another protest iraq war page? :rolleyes:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Redfang on September 28, 2002, 11:56:30 am
:wtf:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 12:12:40 pm
unfortunately if you just pull your heads out of your own arses and take a look around you might realise things are going seriously off the rails in your society.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Blue Lion on September 28, 2002, 12:15:32 pm
My society is fine
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 12:16:53 pm
Oh, goody. More politicoes. Passive resistance and all that.


Damn it, when did people who know nothing about protest strategy gain the right to protest? It worked for MLK and Ghandi because everyone would see that the pigs were kicking the **** out of them for no reason. Nobody cares if a bunch of upper-middle-class whiteboys wanna sit around in a designated-out-of-the-way area and chant.

But what the hell. They're something, at least.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 12:51:29 pm
then do you want to bomb something instead?

and your society is not fine.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 12:53:16 pm
Look what do these people expect? That Saddam will never use his little toys? If he gained target range to hit Britain d'you think he wouldn't do it? One day that regime will attempt to expand itself, and when it does there will be hell to pay. So we either sit back and get millions of our own people slaughtered in ten years time, or we stop him now. I am not prepared to pay the price for the former. We stop him now - we end this before Iraq becomes the birthplace of a new World War.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:01:50 pm
Actually, the government has never really represented the opinions of the average man. A good thing too, as the nation would have fallen apart long ago otherwise.

Besides, the there is little to lose by going into Iraq at any rate, so what does the result matter? :D

Quote
It worked for MLK and Ghandi because everyone would see that the pigs were kicking the **** out of them for no reason.


uh...it did not really work for the latter man. (who by the way was possibly the biggest idiot who ever lived; I even have reasons to have a personal grudge on him :p)
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:11:11 pm
Vyper: Uh-huh. And we had to kill millions of unprepared civilians in Japan in order to save lives. And we had to invade Vietnam to keep the Communists from taking over the world. And the Israelis had more right to Palestine than the natives did. And people who are willing to die to strike a blow against what they see as the embodiment of evil are "cowardly". If someone says 'em enough times, you start to believe them.:rolleyes:



Hmmmm...


You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.
You want to obey Stryke's every command.

This has potential...
:D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Crazy_Ivan80 on September 28, 2002, 01:14:15 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Oh, goody. More politicoes. Passive resistance and all that.


Damn it, when did people who know nothing about protest strategy gain the right to protest?  


probably when democracy got imported. :rolleyes:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 01:15:04 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper
Look what do these people expect? That Saddam will never use his little toys? If he gained target range to hit Britain d'you think he wouldn't do it? One day that regime will attempt to expand itself, and when it does there will be hell to pay. So we either sit back and get millions of our own people slaughtered in ten years time, or we stop him now. I am not prepared to pay the price for the former. We stop him now - we end this before Iraq becomes the birthplace of a new World War.


he's more likely to hit britain than the US and no I dont care because this is a miserable little country and we need an apocalypse.

Oh...so YOU move in and slaughter millions of them under the false flag of altruism?  give me a break.  Im almost as disgusted with your nation as I am with religion - and thats' saying something.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:17:27 pm
nah, just slaughter millions of them under the flag of despotism instead. :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 01:19:52 pm
Quote
Originally posted by CP5670
nah, just slaughter millions of them under the flag of despotism instead. :D


well, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that this is what it comes down to, in the end.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:21:46 pm
Who needs a flag? Let's kill everybody for the sheer, unadulterated hell of it!:D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 01:25:04 pm
Quote
Originally posted by wEvil


he's more likely to hit britain than the US and no I dont care because this is a miserable little country and we need an apocalypse.

Oh...so YOU move in and slaughter millions of them under the false flag of altruism?  give me a break.  Im almost as disgusted with your nation as I am with religion - and thats' saying something.


I'd choose to kill one hundred of Iraq's population rather than let one[/b[ British man, woman or child become a victim of any of Iraq's weapons.

As for being disgusted with my nation... your choice, but I like my country... a lot better than anywhere else. Where do you live?


Now...

Quote

And we had to kill millions of unprepared civilians in Japan in order to save lives.


I'd have done the same thing if I were given the responsibility of making that choice.

Quote

And the Israelis had more right to Palestine than the natives did.


*goes to respond then stops* Why do I say nothing? 'Cos I feking sick of Palestine and Israel coming into a debate about Iraq. It happens all the time! :sigh:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:29:39 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper


I'd choose to kill one hundred of Iraq's population rather than let one[/b[ British man, woman or child become a victim of any of Iraq's weapons.
[/b]

What can I say? You're a psychotic. You're sick. You think this is something to be proud of? You're a bigoted (probably) racist git, as well as having the mentality of a murderer. Yay you.

Quote

I'd have done the same thing if I were given the responsibility of making that choice.


I think that goes without saying. :rolleyes:

Quote

*goes to respond then stops* Why do I say nothing? 'Cos I feking sick of Palestine and Israel coming into a debate about Iraq. It happens all the time! :sigh:


Well, that's too bad, because the whole Iraq situation has more to do with Israel than anything else, excepting possibly Bush I.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:30:25 pm
Quote
well, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that this is what it comes down to, in the end.


I guess many people don't have that then. :D Of course, there is nothing wrong with it though.

Quote
And the Israelis had more right to Palestine than the natives did.


well, anyone has the right to that land as long as they can defend it. :D

Quote
I'd choose to kill one hundred of Iraq's population rather than let one[/b[ British man, woman or child become a victim of any of Iraq's weapons.


From a government's point of view, given the government's objectives, it is far better to have all of the rest of the world's population completely eradicated than to have a scratch on one of its citizens. This is quite rational, given the goals.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:34:06 pm
Well, in a purely Machiavellian sense, I suppose the "anyone has the right to that land as long as they can defend it" thing is true. And in a practical sense. But it reeks of Catch-22.


And yes, that's true for governments. It's a sickness for the PEOPLE to share that sentiment.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: heretic on September 28, 2002, 01:34:32 pm
You're right. we should ignore him. just like we ignored Hitler. All it took was half of Europe to be conqured, and the Japanese empire attacking us to get us in.


Yes, let's instead sit on our ass and wait for him to attack us. That's ****ing logical.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 01:35:28 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9


What can I say? You're a psychotic. You're sick. You think this is something to be proud of? You're a bigoted (probably) racist git, as well as having the mentality of a murderer. Yay you.
[/B]


The difference between you and me is, I'm willing to take the risk of being all those things to insure that you will still have the right to say these things. :blah:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:35:41 pm
Yeah, 'cause, you know, there are ANY ****ING PARALLELS AT ALL.:rolleyes:

Yes, Saddam has both the power and the desire to take over the entire planet. :rolleyes:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: an0n on September 28, 2002, 01:36:42 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper
I'd choose to kill one hundred of Iraq's population rather than let one[/b[ British man, woman or child become a victim of any of Iraq's weapons.

I'm glad that you think so highly of yourself as to be able to put a value on any human life.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:37:40 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper


The difference between you and me is, I'm willing to take the risk of being all those things to insure that you will still have the right to say these things. :blah:


Oh, goody. You don't give a **** if thousands of people die, but if they can't say "****"- ooh, better look out. That's inhuman, can't have that!

Personally, I'd rather be oppressed than dead. At least when you're oppressed you can fight back, and take a couple pigs with you.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:40:11 pm
Quote
Well, in a purely Machiavellian sense, I suppose the "anyone has the right to that land as long as they can defend it" thing is true. And in a practical sense. But it reeks of Catch-22.


Catch-22? :confused:

Quote
And yes, that's true for governments. It's a sickness for the PEOPLE to share that sentiment.


Perhaps, but so is any other sentiment that people can have, so it does not really matter. :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 01:40:35 pm
Quote
Oh, goody. You don't give a **** if thousands of people die, but if they can't say "****"- ooh, better look out. That's inhuman, can't have that!

Personally, I'd rather be oppressed than dead. At least when you're oppressed you can fight back, and take a couple pigs with you.


First paragraph I didn't follow.

And about being oppressed: Do it my way, and we're not oppressed or dead!
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: an0n on September 28, 2002, 01:42:44 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper
And about being oppressed: Do it my way, and we're not oppressed or dead!

:wtf: Eh?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:43:15 pm
The thing is, like I said, we have little to lose by going in Iraq; it would be a very one-sided battle with a quick resolution. At the worst, we get some extra oil. :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:49:18 pm
I was referring to the most famous quote, not the common (sort of incorrect) sense: "Catch-22 means they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing".

Anyway, yes, I'm actually all for an Iraqui invasion- because it gives a pretext for overthrow of our own government, something the complacent can rally behind.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:50:53 pm
Quote
I was referring to the most famous quote, not the common (sort of incorrect) sense: "Catch-22 means they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing".


oh okay; well yes, that is exactly what I mean. Everyone has the right to do anything they want if they have the means. :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 01:53:28 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9
I was referring to the most famous quote, not the common (sort of incorrect) sense: "Catch-22 means they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing".

Anyway, yes, I'm actually all for an Iraqui invasion- because it gives a pretext for overthrow of our own government, something the complacent can rally behind.


Please tell me you mean by democratic means?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: an0n on September 28, 2002, 01:55:33 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper


Please tell me you mean by democratic means?
Haha. You'll be lucky.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 01:55:55 pm
Of course I don't. Democracy after we ESTABLISH the democracy.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 01:57:15 pm
Quote
Please tell me you mean by democratic means?


I guess there is little other way, since no domestic lobbyists can really take on the entire US army... :D

Quote
Of course I don't. Democracy after we ESTABLISH the democracy.


Problem is, a true democracy (or even a republic) will last for maybe a few days before breaking up into tribe-like factions. :p
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: an0n on September 28, 2002, 01:58:48 pm
Quote
Originally posted by CP5670


I guess there is little other way, since no domestic lobbyists can really take on the entire US army... :D



Problem is, a true democracy (or even a republic) will last for maybe a few days before breaking up into tribe-like factions. :p
*cough* Vietnam *cough*
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 02:00:07 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Of course I don't. Democracy after we ESTABLISH the democracy.


The scary thing is, I can believe you mean that.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:02:41 pm
I ain't got no problems with tribe-like factions. That's the eventual plan- you honestly thought I expected 50 million people across thousands of miles and hundreds of cultures to get along under one government? The government we have NOW does about as good a job of that as can be done, and we know how bad THAT is.

And it's true. Military honestly has nothing on large groups of the populace (particularly its own populace) who know the terrain, are armed and prepped fairly well, and have nothing to lose. Army boys are afraid to lose their jobs- revolutionaries aren't afraid to die. Which is gonna fight better?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:03:14 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper


The scary thing is, I can believe you mean that.


This from the guy who'd sooner kill hundreds of people than let one die.:rolleyes:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 02:04:44 pm
"Army boys," because they have the technology. :p That is the key difference in any conflict.

Quote
I ain't got no problems with tribe-like factions. That's the eventual plan- you honestly thought I expected 50 million people across thousands of miles and hundreds of cultures to get along under one government? The government we have NOW does about as good a job of that as can be done, and we know how bad THAT is.


I see, and what will you do with the tribe-like factions, then? :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:12:25 pm
Microstate theory. Hundreds of allied factions, working under a multitiered government where the top level only deals with those things of truly national or global importance, defensive militia-type armies and friendly trade with all not part of it, while still quietly encouraging similar revolutions in those nations. Anyone invades, wesend 'em to the stone age with an army where every civilian is a trained soldier at the drop of a hat, saturation-nuke the bastards in their home country if we can, and never have anything military of ours leave but missiles. Each population-based microstate works on its own local government, somewhat resembling Athenian democracy, and each is grouped into larger regions with similar ones in the area, to deal with larger issues. Repeat on a bigger scale as necessary- there is no size limitation, because the larger the government, the fewer "local" issues and laws are dealt with, and the more inter-regional relations.

Oh, and I wouldn't bank on a technological edge cutting it. For one, we'd be able to steal tech and get defectors, for another, as an0n said, Vietnam. And that's not the only example, though probably the only one commonly known about.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 02:15:07 pm
Sounds good, but then we have essentially the same thing (federalist republic) as what we have today. :p

I like my super-organism better. :D

Quote
Oh, and I wouldn't bank on a technological edge cutting it. For one, we'd be able to steal tech and get defectors, for another, as an0n said, Vietnam. And that's not the only example, though probably the only one commonly known about.


Yes, but these guys wouldn't have any real training, and fanaticism in no real substitute for technology. (that only works if you are outnumbering your enemy by 50 or so to one) What about Vietnam?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 02:15:12 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9


This from the guy who'd sooner kill hundreds of people than let one die.:rolleyes:


You just won't let it go that I value the lives of my countrymen more than those of foreigners... :rolleyes:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:19:27 pm
CP: Well... sort of. No "representative" bull****, though. Everyone votes on whatever they want directly.

Vyper: No, I won't. It's sick and disturbing that you'd value one person you've never met over so many others simply due to nationality. Having admitted that, you are in no position to question anyone else's political ideology.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 02:21:57 pm
Quote
CP: Well... sort of. No "representative" bull****, though. Everyone votes on whatever they want directly.


In other words, that makes anarchy, since it would take so long for any decision to be made that the government would collapse in a matter of weeks. :p :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Shrike on September 28, 2002, 02:23:21 pm
Give it a rest guys........
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Knight Templar on September 28, 2002, 02:28:31 pm
Quote
unfortunately if you just pull your heads out of your own arses and take a look around you might realise things are going seriously off the rails in your society.



:wtf:


i hate it when i get behind on threads
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:29:21 pm
Shrike: Why? This is a political thread. We're doing politics.

CP: Isn't modern technology great? Set a two-hour window (maybe more) for voting, have the polls accessible by internet, give everyone a login similar to a social security number, but harder to defraud (SERIOUSLY), to ensure against faked votes.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 02:30:45 pm
Quote
but harder to defraud (SERIOUSLY)


You do realize that this is almost impossible to do, right? :p :D (instead of a reign of the rabble-rouser types, we now have a reign of hackers)

I say that we should have a fascist dictatorship with a computer as the dictator, and those who program it should be bitter enemies of each other so that nobody gets an advantage. :D
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:33:30 pm
Uh-huh. Which is how it's so easy, eh?

For specific people, it's a bit tough. I can't pluck my teacher's SSNs out of the air (though I might be able to find a celebritiy's once in a while). But on electronic inputs, if you know the trends they follow, you can get a random one right in one or two goes.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 02:34:18 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9


Vyper: No, I won't. It's sick and disturbing that you'd value one person you've never met over so many others simply due to nationality. Having admitted that, you are in no position to question anyone else's political ideology.


Because mine is so radically different from yours, I cannot question anyone elses?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 02:37:05 pm
And Hannibal Lecter's tastes in fine cuisine are just "radically different" from most peoples'. "Radically different" is a far cry from "genocidal sicko". I can tolerate, say, fascists, even see where they're coming from. This is absolutely different.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: vyper on September 28, 2002, 02:40:50 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9
And Hannibal Lecter's tastes in fine cuisine are just "radically different" from most peoples'. "Radically different" is a far cry from "genocidal sicko". I can tolerate, say, fascists, even see where they're coming from. This is absolutely different.


Well, I never claimed it was nice. I just said it was the better of two evils.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 02:53:46 pm
Quote
Originally posted by CP5670


You do realize that this is almost impossible to do, right? :p :D (instead of a reign of the rabble-rouser types, we now have a reign of hackers)

I say that we should have a fascist dictatorship with a computer as the dictator, and those who program it should be bitter enemies of each other so that nobody gets an advantage. :D


Now THATS a good start for a scifi comedy, hehehe.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Shrike on September 28, 2002, 03:42:03 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stryke 9
Shrike: Why? This is a political thread. We're doing politics.
Because you guys are ranting and raving at each other and I want you to cool it.
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 03:45:53 pm
whats with gothgirlies anyway?
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Shrike on September 28, 2002, 04:41:18 pm
This is what.

(http://www.3dap.com/hlp/staff/shrike/goths.jpg)
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: wEvil on September 28, 2002, 04:49:20 pm
who's that one on the right? ;7
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Shrike on September 28, 2002, 04:59:44 pm
I dunno, but I wish I did.  My first, second and third picks. ;7 :devil:
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: CP5670 on September 28, 2002, 05:03:21 pm
*attempts to restrain from vomiting* :p
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Shrike on September 28, 2002, 05:19:49 pm
*attemps to restrain from banning* :p
Title: Not In Our Name
Post by: Stryke 9 on September 28, 2002, 06:52:29 pm
[reserves opinion]

[with difficulty]

*snrrk*
*cough*


Anyway. What's politics without a little ranting? Hell, what's politics without a LOT of ranting?