Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Beowulf on January 24, 2004, 05:34:41 pm
-
To those of you wanting the full version of the apache clip, I've found it. Not sure if its been posted before, but here it is:
http://nsys.web1000.com/movies/apache.zip
Another interesting clip, most of you might have seen, of an AC-130 gunship deployed in Afghanistan. Really amazing.
http://nsys.web1000.com/movies/ac-130u_gunship_video_lo.wmv
Enjoy.
~Beowulf
-
No one has anything to say after seeing the real thing?
-
Welcome to the real world.
-
I think we already saw it I think
-
Yeh, i sure will 'enjoy' watching ppl die.
-
Saw it on the news when it came out. Old news.
Now the AC130 clip, i'll have to see later.
-
those should be Illegal because there is peoples who enjoy's seeing peoples die
-
If you looked at it, when the first guy was shot, he kind of "exploded".
Sick :(
-
Looks like they were dumping their weapons so they wouldn't get busted for having them. But then they move up the tractor to block the view while one of them begins to unwrap something by the tire.
-
Woah. The only reason I posted it was because the one that is EVERYWHERE on the internet is the shortened version. As such, everyone says it was wrong to fire upon them. This one clearly show them moving weaponry, particularly anti-tank/anti-air weaponry.
I guess I didn't mean "enjoy" as in get pleasure out of, just in respect to comparing the two clips, the shortened one and the long one. I certainly don't get any excitement or arousal out of seeing people die, but I am glad they are dead, otherwise Americans or coalition forces could be dead in their place.
~Beowulf.
-
Originally posted by Beowulf
Americans or coalition forces could be dead in their place.
[color=cc9900]And?[/color]
-
Jesus H Christ. If you hate the west so much go and live in ****ing Iran or something
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
Jesus H Christ. If you hate the west so much go and live in ****ing Iran or something
Are you talking to me? I mean, if those Iraqis weren't dead, Americans or Coalition forces could be dead in their place--a bad thing.
I'm glad those Iraqis were creamed!
~Beowulf.
-
Its all so sterile and bloodless. I can see how it would be easy to take a human life when all you see is a little white dot, and then an explosion. No blood, no guts, no screams, no smell of burning flesh. Its like playing Starcraft....
-
Think about that next time you play GTA3...
-
:shivers: kinda scary when you think about it. Sort of reminds me of MGS2 and all the talk about VR training desensitizing you and how Raiden's feelings sort of parallel the player's (he feels no remorse for killing people, 'cuz it's just a game, right? right?)
@Odyssey: WTF is wrong with you? you wouldn't rather have terrorists dead than soldiers?
-
No, Wolfy, I wasn't talking to you
-
Can we leave off the flaming eachother - killing is wrong no matter what, but this isn't an ideal world. If you want a little food for thought - go watch Three Kings, it has a great little angle that shows that despite what people do, and who they might work for or carry out to survive - they might well be normal men and woman with a family... not just meat for killing.
-
[color=cc9900]What Kalfireth said. It doesn't make a damn who dies, they were still a living being and it was still wrong, whether they're carrying thousands of pounds worth of high-tech equipment or an AK47. I don't see the point in making a distinguishment. Sorry if that came across wrongly in my last post.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Can we leave off the flaming eachother - killing is wrong no matter what, but this isn't an ideal world. If you want a little food for thought - go watch Three Kings, it has a great little angle that shows that despite what people do, and who they might work for or carry out to survive - they might well be normal men and woman with a family... not just meat for killing.
But in this case, there iraqi insurgents, practically terrorists because they target their own people, who are quite simply, evil. Thus, i'd much rather they died, than british soldiers, who are trying to help this country, not hinder it. Though of course, i'd much rather they were imprisoned, but that is not practical in these circumstances.
-
That's where you hit the grey area - my point was that I can't stand people with the angle "we are red, they are blue. Therefore when they die it doesn't matter - they aren't like us".
It feels like it's bordering on Nazism.
-
Yes well, i have a far better reason than colours.
-
I'm all ears?
-
I think all peoples earn live in this blue planet
But of course terrorist don't belong here because they hurt Civilians and do so much damage
-
[color=cc9900]You should become a politician, HIG.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]You should become a politician, HIG.[/color]
And hear that bulls-**** other politician speak no thanks
-
Nothing is never down to pure good and evil, and patriotism is the most fickle reason ever to condone death.
Indeed, Hitler was a shining example of what happens when Patriotism goes mad, and turns into Elitism.
-
Originally posted by Holy Imperial Gloriano
And hear that bulls-**** other politician speak no thanks
[color=cc9900]See what I mean? Prime A-1 grade politician material.[/color]
-
:yes:
-
Originally posted by Zeronet
But in this case, there iraqi insurgents, practically terrorists because they target their own people, who are quite simply, evil. Thus, i'd much rather they died, than british soldiers, who are trying to help this country, not hinder it. Though of course, i'd much rather they were imprisoned, but that is not practical in these circumstances.
:yes: :yes: Great stuff.
Terrorists are defined as people who murder, in an organized fashion and on a large scale, civilians. The bombing of Iraq has killed well over 10,000 civilians. Now, tell me again, who are the terrorists?
The fighters in Iraq right now, they are what is called a resistance movement. Perhaps you've heard of such a concept. They exist to drive out the American soldiers who are illegally occupying their country. This seems like a legitimate cause to me.
But let me guess, anyone who kills Americans, soldiers or not, is a terriorist? Right?
Thundfireth: Right on. However, I thought that Three Kings was the usual "brave Americans" movie. Real soldiers would never do that, never risk their lives for Iraqis. They would take the gold and gun everyone else down. The Americans were glorified, the Iraqis (well, those who weren't shown as helpless victims) weere demonized, as usual.
I STRONGLY urge you to go rent a movie called No Man's Land. It shows just how ****ed up war really is, without skewing the perception to any one side.
-
Rictor, I do see what you mean - it was really a case of "isn't that nice, the goody Americans helped the innocent Iraqi civilians", but that scene alone (disregarding the rest of the film) where the Iraqi interogates Barlow does actually have a lot of truth in it. Just because someone is the member of an army - doesn't make them naturally evil. Germans and Allied troops playing football over Christmas between the trenches anyone? They had more in common with eachother than their respective superiors.
However I'm totally against the killing of others because of their beliefs, religion or color (or any other attribute for that matter). If it's their actions however - and those actions are to harm others - then something should be done. Unfortunately - as I said it's a grey area... each circumstance is different. So I can't get into more detail regarding that.
-
Terrorists are defined as people who murder, in an organized fashion and on a large scale, civilians. The bombing of Iraq has killed well over 10,000 civilians. Now, tell me again, who are the terrorists?
rememper Josef Stalin killed millions civilians was he terrorist no he was not some say he was great leader but truth is he was dictator
-
Are you talking to me? I mean, if those Iraqis weren't dead, Americans or Coalition forces could be dead in their place--a bad thing.
It's sentences like those that really make me fear about the future of humanity.
You seriously think there's 'better humans' and humans whose life isn't worth a damn?
-
Originally posted by Lightspeed
It's sentences like those that really make me fear about the future of humanity.
You seriously think there's 'better humans' and humans whose life isn't worth a damn?
Yes. Those who kill my countrymen deserve to die. If you try to kill my family, I will destroy you without hesitation.
I consider my countrymen my family.
~Beowulf
-
Originally posted by Rictor
Terrorists are defined as people who murder, in an organized fashion and on a large scale, civilians. The bombing of Iraq has killed well over 10,000 civilians. Now, tell me again, who are the terrorists?
Those are over exagerated reports by iraqi official attempting to turn others against us.
Saddam was killing thousands of his own people, whould you rather we just let that continue?
Think of how many thousands more would've died if we didnt end it?
Think that with the death of saddam from old age or disease, his sons wouldnt contine his reign? Think again, they were just as crazy as him, And not only that but he would be invading other countrys slaughtering their people as he has done before.
and we may have killed many civilians accidentaly but it is the means to bring an end, because after we are done, hopefully no one will have to die under those circumstances ever again.
-
and we may have killed many civilians accidentaly
In war there is no that kind word of course there civilians die's in heavy bomping and when soldiers fighting in streets
-
but we are not specificaly targetting them
-
Originally posted by Beowulf
Yes. Those who kill my countrymen deserve to die. If you try to kill my family, I will destroy you without hesitation.
I consider my countrymen my family.
~Beowulf
ok, so let's say you live near a border. if someone from over the other side knocked someone from your side out in a pub, would you pick up a crowbar and get some payback?
no-one is superior here. i consider every human life as equal. off course, when i have to choose between a member of my family, and someone i don;t know, the decision i hope to never have to make, i would choose my family, because i know them, because i place value in them. but if i had to choose between some drunken dickhead from Holland and some high prospect college kid from the States, or Iraq, or Russia, i would choose the college kid.
really, patriotism isn;t evil, it will just lead to evil if you don't stop and think often enough.
-
Originally posted by kasperl
ok, so let's say you live near a border. if someone from over the other side knocked someone from your side out in a pub, would you pick up a crowbar and get some payback?
no-one is superior here. i consider every human life as equal. off course, when i have to choose between a member of my family, and someone i don;t know, the decision i hope to never have to make, i would choose my family, because i know them, because i place value in them. but if i had to choose between some drunken dickhead from Holland and some high prospect college kid from the States, or Iraq, or Russia, i would choose the college kid.
really, patriotism isn;t evil, it will just lead to evil if you don't stop and think often enough.
:nod:
-
btw, what codecs does the apache vid clip use?
it wont work
-
Originally posted by Holy Imperial Gloriano
:nod:
odd
you nodd and say odd.
explain yourself.
and for once, try not to lie, and try to keep your english readable.
-
I not normaly agree with you about some things
but I edit that
-
nice, you should really try to post more then one word or one smiley in a post, and keeping your **** consistent through editing is good to.
-
next time then
-
[color=cc9900]Oh good, another thread to file as containing lots of helpful people to inadvertantly prove just how blatantly wrong patriotism is.[/color]
-
Originally posted by kasperl
no-one is superior here. i consider every human life as equal. off course, when i have to choose between a member of my family, and someone i don;t know, the decision i hope to never have to make, i would choose my family, because i know them, because i place value in them. but if i had to choose between some drunken dickhead from Holland and some high prospect college kid from the States, or Iraq, or Russia, i would choose the college kid.
There. Thank you for proving my point. People can be superior to others. When I have to choose, I choose my family, I choose my country--the source of my freedom, the source of my protection, the source of my wellbeing. I love my country--as much as I may want to change it--and will do everything within my power to protect it. If that includes invading other countries or defying "world opinion", so be it. Saddam was a threat, not just to the US, but all freedom loving people. I didn't support the war to get WMDs or free the Kurds--I did so because I know this man's idol is Stalin (an admitted fact), and knew that he hated the west. Those who lend support such a filthy cruel regime as one to gas thousands of his own people, torture political prisoners, and kill more Muslims than any leader in the world, deserve to die.
Originally posted by kasperl
really, patriotism isn;t evil, it will just lead to evil if you don't stop and think often enough.
Really? Loving my country for the freedom, protection, and life that it provides can lead me to a life of evil? Doing what I can to protect what I love will lead me to a life of evil? No, patriotism will not lead to a life of evil, my own personal choice will lead to evil. Being a patriot is an act of love, not hatred.
Let me guess, a bayonet is inherently evil, right?
~Beowulf
-
[color=cc9900]When did love become automatically a Good Thing?
And anyway, since when was Saddam an active threat to the US? Since the US started handing out weapons like a charity?[/color]
-
Wow another thread about Iraq. How interesting.
-
that doesn't prove that one person is superior to another, just that one person may be more important than another person to someone, to me all people have the same potential, but there choices in life make them more or less important or good (two seperate things)
-
every terrorit has something to with US
bin laden rebelion soldier or some boss in soviet union vs Afganistan guess who give weapons to rebels USA of course
So Americans have done more damage them selfs when they did give weapons to Bin Laden (now most hunted man in world
-
Originally posted by Holy Imperial Gloriano
every terrorit has something to with US
[color=cc9900]No.[/color]
-
well, many of them are trying to kill us,
so I would call that something to do with us
-
But these are interesting times - especially since America decided to police the world. I hate to break it to you Beowulf, but not everyone wants the protection of America. The small time farmer in the middle of nowhere may not be affected - but those of us in the middle of it all have to put up with "what is best for us" - whatever our governments decide.
Sure I was born in the UK, so were my parents, and no doubt the British army would protect me and civilians from anyone who attempted to invade us - but I never never wanted my government to start telling other countries what to do. Who are we or America to chose the fate of others? That's not protecting us - thats essentially attacking others and changing things to what our societies hold as ideal. Just because I like cheese - I don't run around hurting all my friends untill they like cheese as well (analogy - incase you wondered).
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]When did love become automatically a Good Thing?
And anyway, since when was Saddam an active threat to the US? Since the US started handing out weapons like a charity?[/color]
When did love become a bad thing? :wtf:
Wow. Another scholar of history! You obviously know nothing about the Iran-Iraq showdown.
Originally posted by Bobboau
that doesn't prove that one person is superior to another, just that one person may be more important than another person to someone, to me all people have the same potential, but there choices in life make them more or less important or good (two seperate things)
I agree with you to a point, Bobboau. However, people are born with different skills, abilities, etc. How they use those skills defines who is superior. Whoever creates, builds, and loves is the superior man. Whoever uses his skill for death, destruction, and looting, is evil. We must be objective about what is evil and what is not. A country like Iraq will always squander in its own rotten filth. But you see, this is not about countries, it is about people. Most Iraqis love freedom (new found) and love personal choice. People like Sadam and his sons are evil and inferior to leaders like Bush and Blair. I'm not saying either of these two are great (I have some serious issues with Bush, making me not want to vote for him) but they are better, among the best in the world.
~Wraith
-
yes but our innaction can have the same effect as action
[pointed at kal]
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
well, many of them are trying to kill us,
so I would call that something to do with us
[color=cc9900]Sure, the great majority have something against the US (does that say anything?), but not all of them.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
But these are interesting times - especially since America decided to police the world. I hate to break it to you Beowulf, but not everyone wants the protection of America. The small time farmer in the middle of nowhere may not be affected - but those of us in the middle of it all have to put up with "what is best for us" - whatever our governments decide.
Sure I was born in the UK, so were my parents, and no doubt the British army would protect me and civilians from anyone who attempted to invade us - but I never never wanted my government to start telling other countries what to do. Who are we or America to chose the fate of others? That's not protecting us - thats essentially attacking others and changing things to what our societies hold as ideal. Just because I like cheese - I don't run around hurting all my friends untill they like cheese as well (analogy - incase you wondered).
I don't think you understand. I don't care about protecting you. I only care about protecting me, my family, my country. If your country has the same goals as ours, then by all means, let us join forces and protect each other.
-
Originally posted by Beowulf
When did love become a bad thing? :wtf:
[color=cc9900]Since Dracula started to love blood, I suppose.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Rictor
:yes: :yes: Great stuff.
Terrorists are defined as people who murder, in an organized fashion and on a large scale, civilians. The bombing of Iraq has killed well over 10,000 civilians. Now, tell me again, who are the terrorists?
Firstly, please provide a source for the numbers of civilian killed in the war, as i believe them to be grossly inflated. Secondly, terrorists are people who deliberately attack civilians with a political motive. At no point, did US Warplanes, deliberately seek to harm civilians, dont be such a idiotic hippy. There is no military advantage in attacking civilians, its a waste of money. The deliberate placement of military forces in schools and hospitals was done by Saddam
The fighters in Iraq right now, they are what is called a resistance movement. Perhaps you've heard of such a concept. They exist to drive out the American soldiers who are illegally occupying their country. This seems like a legitimate cause to me.
Well of course it seems legitimate to you, you don't really care about rebuilding Iraq, you just want vindication for your hippie views on the US. It doesn't really concern you, that these 'resistance' fighters, kill more of their own people than americans. I doubt it concerns you, they sabotage efforts to rebuild the country. I doubt it concerns you, they are the forces of a disposed dictator. They exist, to hamper efforts, to rebuild the country. Of course, your hippie bias will prevent you from seeing this, naturally great satan does not want to help iraq, great satan wishes to plunder the country and occupy it forever.
But let me guess, anyone who kills Americans, soldiers or not, is a terriorist? Right?
Nope, people who deliberately target civilian establishments and Iraq police forces are terrorists. People that attack US soldiers are merely enemy combatents to be killed, so that the war may conclude fully and Iraq restored to its pre-1960 level of wealth. War isn't a good thing by any stretch of the imagination, but sometimes, you just have to do it the hard way, for the greater good.
Thundfireth: Right on. However, I thought that Three Kings was the usual "brave Americans" movie. Real soldiers would never do that, never risk their lives for Iraqis. They would take the gold and gun everyone else down. The Americans were glorified, the Iraqis (well, those who weren't shown as helpless victims) weere demonized, as usual.
I STRONGLY urge you to go rent a movie called No Man's Land. It shows just how ****ed up war really is, without skewing the perception to any one side.
I replied in red.
-
don't think you understand. I don't care about protecting you. I only care about protecting me, my family, my country. If your country has the same goals as ours, then by all means, let us join forces and protect each other.
everyone should protect everyone because we all live in blue planet we call home.
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
yes but our innaction can have the same effect as action
[pointed at kal]
True but - inferior or not - who are any of us, or our countries or governments to decide who gets to live or die? I'm not argueing that everyone around the world should be allowed to murder eachother as they please without the intervention of others, but if you believe that western countries only invaded eastern countries to displace leaders - you're wrong. While the major factor of "oil" isn't all it was done for - there's a certain amount of truth behind the fact that it was a contributing factor.
My point is that things aren't so black and white as "I come from this country, therefore anyone who comes from that country who kills someone from this country should be killed" is a really efficient way to wipe out the human race.
Another point regarding armies - just because a man is a member of the iraqi army doesnt mean he is inheriently evil. Several of my school friends wanted to join the army - not because of how "evil" everyone else was, but merely because they liked it as a career.
Edit:
Originally posted by Beowulf
I don't think you understand. I don't care about protecting you. I only care about protecting me, my family, my country. If your country has the same goals as ours, then by all means, let us join forces and protect each other.
So you would die for your country? Very noble - but I wish your country cared about you as much as you seem to care about your country. I garuntee you that while you're out in the middle of a desert fighting a war for your country, the politicians who told you it was right to go out there and fight will be thousands of miles away leading very productive lives, driving their SUVs to work and eating a healthy three course meal every dinner - not giving a seconds thought to you or your life.
Hate to be the one to break it you - but when it comes to invading other countries, politicians don't care about the men they send - they care about the reasons behind it, and the chances are those reasons aren't in the best interest of the population - they're in the best interests of the politician.
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]Since Dracula started to love blood, I suppose.[/color]
Ohh good. Use an imaginary figment to apply to the real world. Is that the best you can do?
Let me show you: the love of blood :rolleyes: is not an evil thing, what you do to get it is.
BTW, since Dracula was a vampire, and since he needs to drink blood, by your former statements, this makes him on par with the rest of us, right?
Originally posted by Kalfireth
True but - inferior or not - who are any of us, or our countries or governments to decide who gets to live or die? I'm not argueing that everyone around the world should be allowed to murder eachother as they please without the intervention of others, but if you believe that western countries only invaded eastern countries to displace leaders - you're wrong. While the major factor of "oil" isn't all it was done for - there's a certain amount of truth behind the fact that it was a contributing factor.
Bull****. Show me where.
Originally posted by Kalfireth
My point is that things aren't so black and white as "I come from this country, therefore anyone who comes from that country who kills someone from this country should be killed" is a really efficient way to wipe out the human race.
No, its a really efficient way to protect your own country.
-
Originally posted by Beowulf
Ohh good. Use an imaginary figment to apply to the real world. Is that the best you can do?
Let me show you: the love of blood :rolleyes: is not an evil thing, what you do to get it is.
BTW, since Dracula was a vampire, and since he needs to drink blood, by your former statements, this makes him on par with the rest of us, right?
every body needs blood so they can live;)
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
True but - inferior or not - who are any of us, or our countries or governments to decide who gets to live or die? I'm not argueing that everyone around the world should be allowed to murder eachother as they please without the intervention of others, but if you believe that western countries only invaded eastern countries to displace leaders - you're wrong. While the major factor of "oil" isn't all it was done for - there's a certain amount of truth behind the fact that it was a contributing factor.
My point is that things aren't so black and white as "I come from this country, therefore anyone who comes from that country who kills someone from this country should be killed" is a really efficient way to wipe out the human race.
Another point regarding armies - just because a man is a member of the iraqi army doesnt mean he is inheriently evil. Several of my school friends wanted to join the army - not because of how "evil" everyone else was, but merely because they liked it as a career.
Well once must accept the sad fact of the world. Might makes right. Whether that be economically or militarily, its the truth. Nobody can really oppose what the US is doing, so they can do what they like. Of course, this doesnt mean they're 'right', just depends on how you interpret the word.
-
I like the UK, I like Spain, I like most of the former USSR, and for some reason that defies me I still like France, these are contries who we share common a common culture with, and they are our allies, I would rush to defend any one of them as quickly as I would the USA. (unless one was being atacked by the other, wich would make me have to decide wich one I liked more, I'd still try to simply stop the fighting, becase I don't see any of them as beeing simply wrong).
I also like people around the world, all people who don't hate me, if some group of people is being oppressed, I will empathise with them and want to help, for years I hoped we would do something about Afghanastan, I never thought we would and this upset me (especaly seeing as we were partaly to blame for the situation), same thing with Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia (insert long list here). I don't want to force these people to live the way I think they should, I simply want them to not be forced into liveing the way some small minority thinks they should.
Is this arrogance?
-
Zeronet - exactly. Just because you have the largest country doesn't automatically make you "better" or "right" compared to everyone else. Ideally nobody would kill anyone else, indeed America wasn't nearly so interested in fighting terrorism around the world untill someone attacked them. Then suddenly they realised that they weren't as immune and untouchable as they'd like to have believed. Indeed they were lucky they weren't nuked - indeed everyone was. It goes without saying that if one country nukes another - they fight back - and so it goes. It only takes one nuke to persuade most major governments that have them to start thinking a lot more seriously about using them - see how good your countries mighty defences are when that happens. Nobody will be safe.
-
also people in enemy armies arn't nesisaraly evil, but you can't think like that if you are in a battle, in fact that's why we have such an easy ability to dehumanise other people, for that exact situation, if you are in a fight for your life, you can't be thinking about the other guy's famely.
also there are other things we can do than simply invade other contries, in Iran for example, I think we can do a great deal to help the people gain freedom just by giveing them suport, we probly wouldn't need to fire a single shot in that instance (though we should be prepared to should the need arise, as 1992 Iraq shows)
-
I'am just hoping that no one will use Nukes never.Actually those weapons should be Illegal because in wrong hands those are too Dangerous to our planet safety
(now I'am sounding like politic scary)
-
yes, but a nuke is one thing you don't want to be without when you need one.
-
I beg to disagree - nuclear weapons are great because everyone is to scared to use them. Therefore you'll no longer get countries attacking eachother such as China and America because sooner or later one or the other will think "bugger this, nuke time" and that'll be that. The problem is when terrorists or smaller nations with a "nothing to lose" attitude get hold of them - after that things get a lot more dicey. But if you didn't have such an awesome deterent as nuclear weapons there'd be nothing to stop anyone from invading anyone else since conventional weapons would be all that's left.
-
Nukes using fear weapon is good thing but Usage is not
-
[color=cc9900]Should I have known you wouldn't get a joke, Beowulf?
My analogy was, of course, a fictional one. My point is that love is not necessarily a good thing, as with practically any feeling. What if someone loved war? What, even, if someone loved their own life? Would that still be a good thing when they went on a mass slaughter after becoming a wanted man/woman in order to protect their own life?[/color]
-
interesting point, Kal, very nice.
nukes for peace. actually, this makes more sense the more i think about it.
the worst thing about war is still that people are forced to kill others just because they are from a different country. if you put a WWII era German, Britt and Yank in a pub, but took away uniforms language differences, i doubt they would've done anything but buy the other guy a round. that is to me the worst part of a war, killing for no other reason then "if i don't do this, someone else will get hurt because the president of the other country says so".
-
Originally posted by Holy Imperial Gloriano
Nukes using fear weapon is good thing but Usage is not
[color=cc9900]Pray, tell me, how are you going to use them as a fear weapon when you've already made the use of them illegal?
As I said before, you're a great politician, mate.[/color]
-
I was thinking more along the lines of
"today all world leaders have gotten together to sign the 'no more nukes' treaty of 2173, and look at them nukes go flying off into the sun, well the world is safe at last :)...
/*fifteen minutes later a dark shadow passes over head*/
Oh my God, it's a giant asteroid comeing to smash us all to bits!
/*some random world leader*/'don't worry, we'll just use our nuuuoh Crap!'"
-
well, one large rock would solve it all, if that's what you mean.
Einstein said that the 4th WW would be fought with sticks and stones, but i disagree, i think there will be no-one left after the third.
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]Pray, tell me, how are you going to use them as a fear weapon when you've already made the use of them illegal?
As I said before, you're a great politician, mate.[/color]
I just thinked more,about it but of course there is been some dangerous times Cold war in there was Soviets nukes but I hope there is no WW III but world could Change in some point in really bad way I hope not
was thinking more along the lines of
"today all world leaders have gotten together to sign the 'no more nukes' treaty of 2173, and look at them nukes go flying off into the sun, well the world is safe at last ...
/*fifteen minutes later a dark shadow passes over head*/
Oh my God, it's a giant asteroid comeing to smash us all to bits!
/*some random world leader*/'don't worry, we'll just use our nuuuoh Crap!'"
by then there myghty be better way deal them if humans don't kill them selfs before that
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]Should I have known you wouldn't get a joke, Beowulf?
My analogy was, of course, a fictional one. My point is that love is not necessarily a good thing, as with practically any feeling. What if someone loved war? What, even, if someone loved their own life? Would that still be a good thing when they went on a mass slaughter after becoming a wanted man/woman in order to protect their own life?[/color]
No. But you obviously didn't read my post.
I said love is not a bad thing while the individual choice you make can be. The love of war is not wrong, unless, of course you go start one just for fun.
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]What, even, if someone loved their own life?[/color]
Perhaps that is where we differ. I love my life.
-
*waits Troy*
-
[color=cc9900]Where the individual choice is based off the love. Love is not the direct perpetrator of that act of war, but it indirectly caused it and therefore while maybe not inherently evil in itself, it is in no way a good thing. At best, it's neutral.
Remember that love is one of these individual choices you speak of.[/color]
-
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]Where the individual choice is based off the love. Love is not the direct perpetrator of that act of war, but it indirectly caused it and therefore while maybe not inherently evil in itself, it is in no way a good thing. At best, it's neutral.
Remember that love is one of these individual choices you speak of.[/color]
let's see Troy's war started because of love wjen Greece sended massive forces attack agaist one city called Troy
-
Originally posted by Holy Imperial Gloriano
everyone should protect everyone because we all live in blue planet we call home.
Unfortunately such ideals are not possible, if you try to protect everybody you leave yourself vunerable. Then you die.
We have to start protecting ourselves THEN work our way into protecting other countrys,
A country in civil war does not aid another country under attack by a foreign power, its just stupid.
-
[color=cc9900]So who tells you when to stop protecting yourselves and to start protecting everyone else as well?[/color]
-
what codecs does the apache vid require?
-
Originally posted by Krackers87
what codecs does the apache vid require?
\
Good question. It's an *.avi obviously. Winamp will open it, free too.
Originally posted by Odyssey
[color=cc9900]So who tells you when to stop protecting yourselves and to start protecting everyone else as well?[/color]
By protecting others, we protect our selves. There is of course, a limit to this.
-
Originally posted by Beowulf
By protecting others, we protect our selves. There is of course, a limit to this.
I wondered if you'd ever work this out. Not everyone wants Americas "protection".
-
Not everyone in America wants America to protect people either.;)
Look at it this way: Not that long until election time and hopefully Bush will be out.
-
It depends of the definition of 'protection', after all, there is such a thing as 'protective custody'.
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
I wondered if you'd ever work this out. Not everyone wants Americas "protection".
What are you talking about? We don't just protect everyone, we protect ourselves and aid Isreal. Who do we "protect" (define what you mean by this term)?
-
Why aid Israel though? Or any other country for that matter? (Sandwich, you know I don't mean anything by the Israel side of this). But what makes one country more deserving of aid than any other? Why protect them and not someone else?
As for what I mean by protection, I mean what you meant when you said it.
-
Originally posted by Krackers87
what codecs does the apache vid require?
Am I really the only man on this board who knows how to find the G-Spot (http://www.headbands.com/gspot/)? :lol:
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Am I really the only man on this board who knows how to find the G-Spot (http://www.headbands.com/gspot/)? :lol:
woah :wtf:
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Why aid Israel though? Or any other country for that matter? (Sandwich, you know I don't mean anything by the Israel side of this). But what makes one country more deserving of aid than any other? Why protect them and not someone else?
As for what I mean by protection, I mean what you meant when you said it.
I agree why Americans don't aid Africans they have biffest proplem in world and that's Aids & H.I.V
-
Originally posted by Krackers87
woah :wtf:
Click the link. Despite the name it's quite worksafe :D Once you've got it you won't need to ask what codec is needed half as much.
-
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/lifecynical.php
has to do with this kind of stuff, i thought it was very god, some ppl think it was crap, i would like to get some other opinions
-
It's pretty good, maybe gets some people to take a step back and take a look at the big picture. But I fear his dream will stay a dream, mankind will probably never exist without war/conflict....we're just too plain stupid.
Another good quote for this matter:
"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends."
-- J.R.R. Tolkien
-
THANK YOU! You are the first person other than me to complement this, on another forum all they did was call it hippy trash (bob marely quote) badly made, no point, and other ridiculous bull..
I am sooo happy to see that there ARE some mature people on the internet.
-
[color=cc9900]It makes an excellent point, although unfortunately anyone who would be better off influenced by it will renounce it. That's the way the world works. It's also got a few spelling and grammar errors, luckily offset by the excellent choice of backing music. How long until the record companies sue the author?[/color]