Bet you 10 euros, within two years there'll be

In this section, you can talk relaxedly about everyday matters, and also engage in more serious discussions. Please try to keep this place accessible to everyone and write your posts in English.
Message
Author
User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

Bet you 10 euros, within two years there'll be

#1 Post by t.a.j. » 16 Mar 2009 09:53

another "terrorist" attack on US territory. Not quite the scope of 911 maybe, but enough to go and blame Obama's "slacking security policy".

Why? Because Mr. Evil 2 himself seems to start creating the discoursive climate for that interpretation: http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Cheney_US_ ... 52009.html

I hope I'm just overestimating the moral degeneration of the new american right, but the bad guys seem to be perfectly willing to slaughter innocents for feeble political and economical goals.

To be serious, something like this was to be expected, it's a common political maneuver to attack your opponent on an issue where he disagrees with you. And the fact that you can again use this for fear mongering and seeding of doubt, a very effective propaganda strategy, just makes it extra juicy. So there is a rather simple explanation for this.
Non the less, I "like" the "preparing for another attack" story enough to bet an insignificant amount of money on it.
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
End Of An Era
Posts: 5872
Joined: 11 Apr 2004 00:56
Location: here, duh!

#2 Post by End Of An Era » 16 Mar 2009 13:14

i am not going to bet against that. i wish i could be more optimistic and say another terrorist attack will not happen, but america always draw so much hatred towards themselves, it is bound to happen again.

User avatar
Metal Fan
Posts: 1854
Joined: 28 Mar 2008 07:49
Location: In Angband, chatting with Melkor and learning how to rule the world!

#3 Post by Metal Fan » 16 Mar 2009 19:20

yip.
⋨The Dagor Dagorath, the great final battle at which the forces of the brothers Manwë and Melkor will face one another, and Arda will be unmade.⋩
Is in with Bender on his plan
Blind Guardian wrote:A fairly small but absolutely bravehearted crowd in Tempe has made that a night remember. Marcus(on behalf of the band) says: Thank you:-)

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#4 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 16 Mar 2009 20:18

Well, I say it's just a matter of time before North Korea launches its missiles and ushers the western world into a new war. So in that respect I'd say Cheney is right.

But if that is the case, is it something Obama could prevent? I doubt it, especially not on the short range. The seeds of war were sown in the Bush era, and although I am confident Obabma could take a large step towards reshaping the world-stage, such a thing takes time and patience. There's too much turmoil in the former middle-east and in the communist countries, that it's realisyic to assume that those who oppose freedom will be giving Obama enough time to re-eshtablish the faith in America.

I hope I am proven wrong, but somewhere I fear for another 9/11 or another war which involves half the world.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Curufin
Posts: 184
Joined: 17 Aug 2002 23:58
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Contact:

#5 Post by Curufin » 17 Mar 2009 03:30

To be honest, I'd rather live with my freedom and face another terrorist attack than have the government chip away at my rights in the name of anti-terrorism. I'm in a very small minority, though.
Official Blind Guardian Forum Tarot Pimp.

Visit http://www.curufin.com/bg for all of your Blind Guardian needs!

Bubbles everywhere, raise your hands into the air, we're bubblers, bubblers of the world!

Periaatteessa se tarkoittaa periaatteessa

Skyclad
Posts: 483
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:07
Location: Caro, Michigan U.S.A.
Contact:

#6 Post by Skyclad » 17 Mar 2009 03:37

I wish the Russians were still our biggest enemy. At least they got drunk andightened up once in a while.
"The Simpsons is not real life"-Skyclads mom.

My My... MySPace: http://www.myspace.com/thetruebritton

User avatar
End Of An Era
Posts: 5872
Joined: 11 Apr 2004 00:56
Location: here, duh!

#7 Post by End Of An Era » 17 Mar 2009 08:10

As Drew already implied, the biggest enemy for most, if not all, western countries is their governement and anti-terrorism movements restricting any movement up to the point where we are forced to live in bomb-shelters for the rest of our lives.

Hey, but at least we won't get killed by terrorists :roll:

User avatar
Sleeping Dragon
Posts: 1373
Joined: 30 Jun 2003 12:14
Location: In The Hooooo-Lyyyyy-Laaaaand...
Contact:

#8 Post by Sleeping Dragon » 17 Mar 2009 08:55

if we word-censor the word terrorists and make it shiny happy people the world would be a bit better.
ᛁᚠ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚲᚪᚾ ᚱᛠᛞ ᚦᛁᛋ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚪᚱᛖ ᛏᚱ00!
*Will not be waking up before 2008*

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#9 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 17 Mar 2009 09:15

Sleeping Dragon wrote:if we word-censor the word terrorists and make it shiny happy people the world would be a bit better.
Just like we would achieve the opposite if we word-censor the name Obama and change it into Osama.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Sleeping Dragon
Posts: 1373
Joined: 30 Jun 2003 12:14
Location: In The Hooooo-Lyyyyy-Laaaaand...
Contact:

#10 Post by Sleeping Dragon » 17 Mar 2009 10:12

we need to change it to Adama
ᛁᚠ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚲᚪᚾ ᚱᛠᛞ ᚦᛁᛋ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚪᚱᛖ ᛏᚱ00!
*Will not be waking up before 2008*

User avatar
End Of An Era
Posts: 5872
Joined: 11 Apr 2004 00:56
Location: here, duh!

#11 Post by End Of An Era » 17 Mar 2009 10:15

Sleeping Dragon wrote:if we word-censor the word terrorists and make it shiny happy people the world would be a bit better.
just like some dutch politicians who name all immigrants 'new dutch' instead of turkish, moroccan, african or whatever.

User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

#12 Post by t.a.j. » 17 Mar 2009 10:32

Sleeping Dragon wrote:we need to change it to Adama
Yay! But then we need to censor "terrorist" into Cylon.
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
Joost
Posts: 3799
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Contact:

#13 Post by Joost » 17 Mar 2009 11:55

Skyclad wrote:I wish the Russians were still our biggest enemy. At least they got drunk andightened up once in a while.
Ah well, just give Putin a couple of years, and you're probably back there! :D
You charge each other for the time and breath it takes to say 'good morning',
But the truth is slowly dawning -- things are getting out of hand,
We all pursue our shattered dreams along the roads to our own ruin --
Watch our empires sink and wash away like castles made of sand.
And so cast off the lies that are your lives and find the truth within.
-- Martin Walkyier

Also, Balrogs have wings.

::.: Homepage .::. last.fm .::. Facebook .::. Flickr :.::

Led Guardian
Posts: 2440
Joined: 26 Mar 2008 21:08
Location: Somewhere less cliché than far beyond

#14 Post by Led Guardian » 17 Mar 2009 21:00

Curufin wrote:To be honest, I'd rather live with my freedom and face another terrorist attack than have the government chip away at my rights in the name of anti-terrorism. I'm in a very small minority, though.
But you're in the minority with me, so that makes you right. :D
'Nowhere has this renunciation of man's transience been more joyous or uplifting than in the medium of airport carpets.'

Skyclad
Posts: 483
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:07
Location: Caro, Michigan U.S.A.
Contact:

#15 Post by Skyclad » 17 Mar 2009 22:28

Joost wrote:
Skyclad wrote:I wish the Russians were still our biggest enemy. At least they got drunk andightened up once in a while.
Ah well, just give Putin a couple of years, and you're probably back there! :D

I just saw this on the news. It might not even take a few years. :o

http://www.blind-guardian.com/forum/vie ... 38#1358438
"The Simpsons is not real life"-Skyclads mom.

My My... MySPace: http://www.myspace.com/thetruebritton

User avatar
Lord Borbak
Posts: 262
Joined: 09 Oct 2002 21:43
Location: Quebekistan Soviet Socialist Republic

#16 Post by Lord Borbak » 18 Mar 2009 01:06

I wouldn't worry about it all. Jesus Obama will save the world.
Proudly, without God, I conquer!

User avatar
ThePKH
Posts: 1288
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:22
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland
Contact:

#17 Post by ThePKH » 18 Mar 2009 08:23

I'm fine as long as there's enough beer for all that want to drink and party instead of fighting and worrying. :)
I still am the terror that flaps in the night!

User avatar
End Of An Era
Posts: 5872
Joined: 11 Apr 2004 00:56
Location: here, duh!

#18 Post by End Of An Era » 18 Mar 2009 10:28

hear hear! *raises glasses*

but some guys will prolly get jealous and deny us the right to drink and get drunk. and we gotta fight to reclaim that right.. *sighs*

Wicked Child
Posts: 321
Joined: 02 Mar 2004 06:13
Location: Brazil
Contact:

#19 Post by Wicked Child » 18 Mar 2009 14:49

The Rider Of Rohan wrote:Well, I say it's just a matter of time before North Korea launches its missiles and ushers the western world into a new war. So in that respect I'd say Cheney is right.
Well, by that you can say that EVERY country who has nuclear weapons(including yours) are potentially a fuse for a world war and nuclear holocaust, huh?
The Rider Of Rohan wrote:There's too much turmoil in the former middle-east and in the communist countries, that it's realisyic to assume that those who oppose freedom will be giving Obama enough time to re-eshtablish the faith in America.
What specifically is that 'turmoil' that you're speaking of? And 'those who oppose freedom...'?? I don't think that you can call actual freedom what the USA has been doing for decades about middle-eastern and "communists" countries.. That's even the most crucial difference between Obama and all other presidents since Reagan.

I even hope Obama can manage to put another perspective for the north-american understanding of freedom.. that concept that has created so much terror around the world.
The Rider Of Rohan wrote:I hope I am proven wrong, but somewhere I fear for another 9/11 or another war which involves half the world.
Yeah.. you definetely need another war freak republican on the white house so you can convert your fear in votes and oil.
You're going to hell. But not the cool one, that's where I'll go.
You go to the crappy hell.

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#20 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 18 Mar 2009 23:55

Wicked Child wrote:What specifically is that 'turmoil' that you're speaking of? And 'those who oppose freedom...'??
Well, just look at the numerous countries who like to have their nukes pointed towards Washington and Jerusalem (countries such as Iran, North-Korea, Syria and Pakistan) and you're pretty close to getting an idea of what I'm talking about.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

Wicked Child
Posts: 321
Joined: 02 Mar 2004 06:13
Location: Brazil
Contact:

#21 Post by Wicked Child » 19 Mar 2009 01:19

The Rider Of Rohan wrote:
Wicked Child wrote:What specifically is that 'turmoil' that you're speaking of? And 'those who oppose freedom...'??
Well, just look at the numerous countries who like to have their nukes pointed towards Washington and Jerusalem (countries such as Iran, North-Korea, Syria and Pakistan) and you're pretty close to getting an idea of what I'm talking about.
Oh I see. Those who oppose freedom are the countries that AIM at others. What would you call then the countries that ATTACK others....? :?
You're going to hell. But not the cool one, that's where I'll go.
You go to the crappy hell.

Skyclad
Posts: 483
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:07
Location: Caro, Michigan U.S.A.
Contact:

#22 Post by Skyclad » 19 Mar 2009 01:33

Wicked Child wrote: What would you call then the countries that ATTACK others....? :?
Mighty.
"The Simpsons is not real life"-Skyclads mom.

My My... MySPace: http://www.myspace.com/thetruebritton

Traveller in Time
Posts: 1052
Joined: 02 Sep 2002 19:43

#23 Post by Traveller in Time » 19 Mar 2009 01:43

Skyclad wrote:
Wicked Child wrote: What would you call then the countries that ATTACK others....? :?
Mighty.
I bet in my inner heart that not all americans do think so.
Sorry about my bad english, but the good one is on vacation!

User avatar
End Of An Era
Posts: 5872
Joined: 11 Apr 2004 00:56
Location: here, duh!

#24 Post by End Of An Era » 19 Mar 2009 08:01

luckily, no. i've spoken to a lot of americans who, according to their point of view, do not deserve to live in america but some place better. :P

Wicked Child
Posts: 321
Joined: 02 Mar 2004 06:13
Location: Brazil
Contact:

#25 Post by Wicked Child » 19 Mar 2009 17:42

Skyclad wrote:
Wicked Child wrote: What would you call then the countries that ATTACK others....? :?
Mighty.
So as were the Hitler's Germany and the Roman empire. Still a shame for our history.
You're going to hell. But not the cool one, that's where I'll go.
You go to the crappy hell.

User avatar
No‘am
Posts: 614
Joined: 12 Jun 2003 19:47
Location: 42/13, Mt. Scopus/ rivertown, Western Galillee
Contact:

#26 Post by No‘am » 19 Mar 2009 19:06

t.a.j. wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:we need to change it to Adama
Yay! But then we need to censor "terrorist" into Cylon.
As in "terrorist tea"?
Male me marem putatis? Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo

イン ウィーノー ウェーリタース

User avatar
Sleeping Dragon
Posts: 1373
Joined: 30 Jun 2003 12:14
Location: In The Hooooo-Lyyyyy-Laaaaand...
Contact:

#27 Post by Sleeping Dragon » 19 Mar 2009 19:16

No‘am wrote:
t.a.j. wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:we need to change it to Adama
Yay! But then we need to censor "terrorist" into Cylon.
As in "terrorist tea"?
you're confusing it with terrorist curry.
ᛁᚠ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚲᚪᚾ ᚱᛠᛞ ᚦᛁᛋ ᚣᚩᚢ ᚪᚱᛖ ᛏᚱ00!
*Will not be waking up before 2008*

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#28 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 05 Apr 2009 11:18

The Rider Of Rohan wrote:Well, I say it's just a matter of time before North Korea launches its missiles and ushers the western world into a new war. So in that respect I'd say Cheney is right.

But if that is the case, is it something Obama could prevent? I doubt it, especially not on the short range. The seeds of war were sown in the Bush era, and although I am confident Obabma could take a large step towards reshaping the world-stage, such a thing takes time and patience. There's too much turmoil in the former middle-east and in the communist countries, that it's realisyic to assume that those who oppose freedom will be giving Obama enough time to re-eshtablish the faith in America.

I hope I am proven wrong, but somewhere I fear for another 9/11 or another war which involves half the world.
I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.
Obama condemns North Korea rocket launch

(CNN) -- American officials condemned the North Korean launch of a long-range rocket Sunday, with President Obama calling it a "provocative act."
A recent satellite image shows a rocket sitting on its launch pad in northeast North Korea.

A recent satellite image shows a rocket sitting on its launch pad in northeast North Korea.

The rocket, a Taepodong 2, was launched at around 11:30 a.m. local time Sunday (2:30 a.m. GMT) at a base in the northeastern part of the country. Officials in Washington, D.C., confirmed early Sunday that the rocket cleared Japan.

Preliminary data show that two objects, likely boosters from the rocket, apparently fell around Japan -- one in the Sea of Japan and one in the Pacific Ocean.

In a statement, Obama said the launch was "a clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718, which expressly prohibits North Korea from conducting ballistic missile-related activities of any kind." Video Watch rocket's path over Japan »

"With this provocative act, North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint, and further isolated itself from the community of nations," Obama said. "We will immediately consult with our allies in the region, including Japan and (South Korea), and members of the U.N. Security Council to bring this matter before the Council," Obama added. "I urge North Korea to abide fully by the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council and to refrain from further provocative actions."

Despite criticism by the U.S. and other nations, plans to launch the rocket had been applauded by political parties and organizations in various countries, North Korea's news agency reported Sunday.

A secretariat of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union blasted the U.S. on Tuesday for its "outrageous interference in the internal affairs" of North Korea, the agency reported.

Trade organizations in the Czech Republic also hailed the projected launch, the agency reported.

While the United States and South Korea confirmed the rocket launch, the payload of the rocket remained unclear. North Korea has said the rocket was to carry a satellite into space, but the United States, South Korea and other nations fear it could be a missile with a warhead attached.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiap ... index.html
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Belgarion
Posts: 280
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:30
Location: Istanbul-Freiburg

#29 Post by Belgarion » 05 Apr 2009 13:34

Wow, all the paranoia about the nuclear arms.

The thing is, no country with nuclear capabilities could ever dare to fire their nuclear bombs onto their enemies in the 21st century. This is science fiction. The sole reason for developing and stocking up nuclear bombs is showing off that "you", too, are in the game and intimidate your enemies. It's not like North Korea or Pakistan will suddenly lauch their nuclear rockets over the USA and expect to live peacefully after. 1 nuclear explosion in any of the nuclear countries would immediately lead to a WW 3 and the result of such a war would be the destruction of the modern world as we know it. Back to the Stone Age in a blink. No one would dare the consequences.
In this world there are two tragedies, one is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it. Oscar Wilde

God gave men a brain and a penis and only enough blood to work one at a time.

Kankra
Posts: 116
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54

#30 Post by Kankra » 05 Apr 2009 15:10

Belgarion wrote:Wow, all the paranoia about the nuclear arms.

The thing is, no country with nuclear capabilities could ever dare to fire their nuclear bombs onto their enemies in the 21st century. This is science fiction. The sole reason for developing and stocking up nuclear bombs is showing off that "you", too, are in the game and intimidate your enemies. It's not like North Korea or Pakistan will suddenly lauch their nuclear rockets over the USA and expect to live peacefully after. 1 nuclear explosion in any of the nuclear countries would immediately lead to a WW 3 and the result of such a war would be the destruction of the modern world as we know it. Back to the Stone Age in a blink. No one would dare the consequences.
And what if in some country a fucked-up leader doesnt give a shit if his people live or not and decides to fuck over some people he doesnt like?

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#31 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 05 Apr 2009 15:59

Belgarion wrote:Wow, all the paranoia about the nuclear arms.

The sole reason for developing and stocking up nuclear bombs is showing off that "you", too, are in the game and intimidate your enemies.
That's a pretty naïve statements. Weapens are designed with the use of them in mind. Some leaders won't actually go as far as using them, some will. Do you seriously think none of the arms created during the cold war were ever fired? And even if you did, the bombs that were launched against Hiroshima and Nagasaki were far from science fiction.
It's not like North Korea or Pakistan will suddenly lauch their nuclear rockets over the USA and expect to live peacefully after.
Well, that's actually what's happening right now. North Korea fired their missiles through Japanese airspace in an act of arrogancy. That's as close to a declaration of war as you can possibly imagine. That's not to say that Japan will immediately aim their missiles at every guy named Kim they can target west of the sea, but it would be naïve to rule it out without giving it a second thought.
1 nuclear explosion in any of the nuclear countries would immediately lead to a WW 3 and the result of such a war would be the destruction of the modern world as we know it. Back to the Stone Age in a blink. No one would dare the consequences.
Well, but if there's anything history teaches us, it's that nations are created and destroyed through war, with peace being just a temporary thing. Still, I hope you're right in your last bit.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

Skyclad
Posts: 483
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:07
Location: Caro, Michigan U.S.A.
Contact:

#32 Post by Skyclad » 05 Apr 2009 16:23

M.A.D.
"The Simpsons is not real life"-Skyclads mom.

My My... MySPace: http://www.myspace.com/thetruebritton

User avatar
Belgarion
Posts: 280
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:30
Location: Istanbul-Freiburg

#33 Post by Belgarion » 05 Apr 2009 16:52

Kankra wrote: And what if in some country a fucked-up leader doesnt give a shit if his people live or not and decides to fuck over some people he doesnt like?
Even though he knows that his action will surely get his ass nuked along with his people as a consequence? I doubt any leader would be so unrealistic and start a nuclear war just out of anger and madness. They wouldn't let him do that.
The Rider Of Rohan wrote:That's a pretty naïve statements. Weapens are designed with the use of them in mind. Some leaders won't actually go as far as using them, some will. Do you seriously think none of the arms created during the cold war were ever fired? And even if you did, the bombs that were launched against Hiroshima and Nagasaki were far from science fiction.
Nuclear bombs are designed to be used as a last resort. I've clearly based my statement on the 21st century. Back in 1945, only the USA had that technology and they could play the God all the way they wanted. Now it's immposible to play the God. In 1945, it was a reality.

As for the nuclear bombs that were fired during the cold war: of course they were fired. That was just a part of the show-off. And you know, experiments are integral to any discipline of science.

USA: hey commies, I'm detonating a 100 Kiloton atom bomb over the Pasific, behold my might!

1 day later:

USSR: Hey yankies, I'm detonating my Tsar bomb: it's 100 Megatons. Beat it. I could destroy half the earth with this.

etc.
Well, that's actually what's happening right now. North Korea fired their missiles through Japanese airspace in an act of arrogancy. That's as close to a declaration of war as you can possibly imagine. That's not to say that Japan will immediately aim their missiles at every guy named Kim they can target west of the sea, but it would be naïve to rule it out without giving it a second thought.
Again, they want the world to know that they are capable. I don't approve their intentions against Japan, since, Japan, although a powerful country, keeps its oath of staying passive in military actions.
Well, but if there's anything history teaches us, it's that nations are created and destroyed through war, with peace being just a temporary thing. Still, I hope you're right in your last bit.
I'm afraid that after a possible nuclear WW 3, there will be not much left to reconstruct.
In this world there are two tragedies, one is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it. Oscar Wilde

God gave men a brain and a penis and only enough blood to work one at a time.

User avatar
The Rider Of Rohan
Posts: 3361
Joined: 21 Jan 2003 15:30
Location: Iron Hils 90210
Contact:

#34 Post by The Rider Of Rohan » 05 Apr 2009 17:53

Nuclear bombs are designed to be used as a last resort. I've clearly based my statement on the 21st century. Back in 1945, only the USA had that technology and they could play the God all the way they wanted. Now it's immposible to play the God. In 1945, it was a reality.
Nuclear bombs were designed to kill people. It's the politicians who decide to use them as a last resort. And politicians, as Kankra pointed out, don't always have the general interest as their first priority. If they did, Palpatine would never have crowned himself emperor.

It's a little black-and-white to point out the reality of 1945. There was a very serious atomic threat from the Nazi's, who were suspected to have the bomb too. It was only years after the war that the world found out that the Germans were working on the bomb, they just didn't figure out how to make one like the Americans did. So the fact that the USA was the only one with a bomb is obviously true from a historical point of view, but that wasn't something that played any part in Truman's head when he tried to prevent the Wii from ever being built.
Again, they want the world to know that they are capable. I don't approve their intentions against Japan, since, Japan, although a powerful country, keeps its oath of staying passive in military actions.
But for how long? And it's too easy to say that Korea is just showing us their capabilities by launching a missile through Nipponese airspace. There's a difference between showing off the length of your penis and putting your penis somewhere it doesn't belong.
I'm afraid that after a possible nuclear WW 3, there will be not much left to reconstruct.
I'm sure there will be something. Life always chooses life, even if it would be in Switserland.
spamel wrote:
Sleeping Dragon wrote:i just don't understand what's so wrong with being a woman...
Periods.

User avatar
Joost
Posts: 3799
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Contact:

#35 Post by Joost » 05 Apr 2009 18:04

North Korea is not going to lead the world into a world wide scale war. They have no allies. None. Zero. They can launch a nuke and then be nuked to the ground themselves. And really, that's about all they can possibly do.

A conflict between the Western World and some countries in the Arab world being the cause of WW3? Quite likely I'd say, with Saudi Arabia as the biggest risk, due to the combination of power and oil (many countries are dependent on Saudi Arabia in some way or another). Saudi Arabia has, as far as I know, no nukes, but they need them. Cutting the world off from their own oil fields will wreck just as much havoc on a global scale (there will be less massive destruction on specific spots, but there will hardly be a place left free from the havoc).

A conflict between the Western World and China being the cause of WW3? About as likely as the Arab world being the cause of it, I'd say. Economically, China is incredibly powerful, as they are pretty much the provider of loans to the western world.

A conflict between the Western World and Russia being the cause? A real possibility I'd say, but I wouldn't bet on it if I had China and the Arab World as alternate options. They are less economically influential than the Arab states or China, but still have a quite big sphere of influence in Central Easia and Eastern Europe especially.

North Korea? Not a chance in hell. Their worldwide economic position is non-existent. They have no allies. They have no sphere of influence. They can threaten with nukes, but that's really the only type of threat they have. And they know that attacking any other country with a nuke is equal to suicide.

Oh yes, and while they do have nukes, the only one they tested had a power of 0.5 kiloton. That's enough to make glass shatter and cause injuries at a distance of 1.48 miles. As a comparison, the nuclear bomb in Hiroshima was 12.5 kiloton, and the tsar bomba was 50 megaton.

If anything, nuclear weapons have made the world a more peaceful place. From our frame of reference, it may be quite non-obvious, but the 63 years following the first nuclear attack have been among the most peaceful in history. It's a unique thing in history, and principles such as Mutually Assured Destruction, which was already mentioned by Skyclad, have a lot to do with it.
You charge each other for the time and breath it takes to say 'good morning',
But the truth is slowly dawning -- things are getting out of hand,
We all pursue our shattered dreams along the roads to our own ruin --
Watch our empires sink and wash away like castles made of sand.
And so cast off the lies that are your lives and find the truth within.
-- Martin Walkyier

Also, Balrogs have wings.

::.: Homepage .::. last.fm .::. Facebook .::. Flickr :.::

User avatar
Belgarion
Posts: 280
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:30
Location: Istanbul-Freiburg

#36 Post by Belgarion » 05 Apr 2009 18:19

The Rider Of Rohan wrote: I'm sure there will be something. Life always chooses life, even if it would be in Switserland.
Or even in Sweden.
Joost wrote:A conflict between the Western World and some countries in the Arab world being the cause of WW3? Quite likely I'd say, with Saudi Arabia as the biggest risk, due to the combination of power and oil (many countries are dependent on Saudi Arabia in some way or another). Saudi Arabia has, as far as I know, no nukes, but they need them. Cutting the world off from their own oil fields will wreck just as much havoc on a global scale (there will be less massive destruction on specific spots, but there will hardly be a place left free from the havoc).
I'm eagerly waiting for the glorious day when Saudi Arabia (and in that respect, all the oil rich Arab countries) will run out of oil. They would be nothing without their precious oil, a non-dimensional desolete point on the globe; it's so sad that they became so wealthy without real hard work and science, thanks to their "natural" resources.
North Korea? Not a chance in hell. Their worldwide economic position is non-existent. They have no allies. They have no sphere of influence. They can threaten with nukes, but that's really the only type of threat they have. And they know that attacking any other country with a nuke is equal to suicide.
I completely agree. But I also think that this situation is equally valid for any other nuclear country.
In this world there are two tragedies, one is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it. Oscar Wilde

God gave men a brain and a penis and only enough blood to work one at a time.

User avatar
Joost
Posts: 3799
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Contact:

#37 Post by Joost » 05 Apr 2009 18:26

Belgarion wrote:I'm eagerly waiting for the glorious day when Saudi Arabia (and in that respect, all the oil rich Arab countries) will run out of oil.
That moment will be... interesting. (Probably in the same sense as that of the Chinese curse "may you live in interesting times".)
You charge each other for the time and breath it takes to say 'good morning',
But the truth is slowly dawning -- things are getting out of hand,
We all pursue our shattered dreams along the roads to our own ruin --
Watch our empires sink and wash away like castles made of sand.
And so cast off the lies that are your lives and find the truth within.
-- Martin Walkyier

Also, Balrogs have wings.

::.: Homepage .::. last.fm .::. Facebook .::. Flickr :.::

Kankra
Posts: 116
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54

#38 Post by Kankra » 06 Apr 2009 12:01

I'm waiting for the day when the Chinese people will arise and demand what's theirs. Atm millions of Chinese people are nothing more than oppressed slaves of the system, earning atrocious salaries while pushing forward the Chinese economy that's reaping in billions of dollars in profit.

The Western influence will, some day, lead to an awakening similar to the European Enlightenment in the 18th century. This will be a good thing, but I can't say I'd like to be still alive when that happens.

The oil-rich Arabian countries on the other hand... they just suck. Mostly awfully backward cultures with century-old religious and moralic views, who've - due to religious and political oppression (mostly by their own people) - have contributed nothing, neither intellectually, scientifically nor culturally, during the last centuries.

edit: Were the Arabs a people in Civilization, they'd be on the bottom of the list. Through a cruel stroke of "luck", they're now the richest nations of the world. Without oil, they'd still ride on fucking camels and were busy declaring a djihad on their neighbours for stealing a goat of theirs.

The single good thing about this is: you can't buy sophistication or culture. or the ability to produce great works of art or science. If the Arabian nations don't jump from their medieval societies to the modern times in a few decades soon, they'll fall back into the desolate state they were in before WW2.

User avatar
Belgarion
Posts: 280
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:30
Location: Istanbul-Freiburg

#39 Post by Belgarion » 06 Apr 2009 13:14

Kankra wrote:
The oil-rich Arabian countries on the other hand... they just suck. Mostly awfully backward cultures with century-old religious and moralic views, who've - due to religious and political oppression (mostly by their own people) - have contributed nothing, neither intellectually, scientifically nor culturally, during the last centuries.
That's so true. And from time to time I wonder how they ended up like that. And what's the solution? I think Arabs would be much better off if they hadn't accepted Islam as their religion in the first place; but the situation is a little complicated when one thinks that before the birth of Islam in 600's, Arabs were again at the bottom of the pit of civilization: They worshipped man-made idols, buried their own daughters alive since they weren't worth nothing for men (women were basically worse than slaves) and some other cruel bullshit. With the Islam, they developed quickly and began to contribute to science and philosophy long before Christians. That golden period of Arabic nations lasted sometime until 1200, maybe. Then, something unexplainable happens in their world and they, like everyone has vowed to agree, go backwards till today. Wtf? Can someone please explain what went wrong and why they got gradually mass-brainwashed? Aliens?

Now back to Islam. I don't think Islam itself is to blame, since it was quite modern for 600's, but it's the ignorant attitude of Arabs that can't accept that it's not the answer to their problems anymore. 600s are long gone. You can't fucking just look it up and try to solve your problems in 2000s (that's true for every other religion of course). And most importantly, you can't have a fucking "Islamic Republic of ...". No way. You can't expect to develope, if sheiks, who are mostly the true scums of this world, make up a portion of your "parliament" and have a right to make "law". You can't expect to develope, if you are not even allowed to believe in the Big Bang theory since it contradicts the almighty "God". You simply can't rule your country with the primitive rules of 600s. That's fucking 1400 years. Well, the sad thing is, they know that, too, and they do nothing, of course. That's how you herd the sheep. Unless the sheep revolt and seek reform just like Christians did, they deserve to lead their lives even more pathetically. I can't tolerate this kind of weakness.

And they say that Islam, compared to Christianity, is a young religion: just give them time and they will realize and take action. I find this hard to belive. This argument is naive.
In this world there are two tragedies, one is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it. Oscar Wilde

God gave men a brain and a penis and only enough blood to work one at a time.

User avatar
Joost
Posts: 3799
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Contact:

#40 Post by Joost » 06 Apr 2009 13:29

Belgarion wrote:I don't think Islam itself is to blame, since it was quite modern for 600's, but it's the ignorant attitude of Arabs that can't accept that it's not the answer to their problems anymore.
I guess you are right here. If you take the Bible in one hand and the Qur'an in the other hand, I don't think you can say the contents of the Qur'an are more shocking or 'backwards'. All of the bad stuff that's in the Qur'an (and more) is in the Bible too.

In the end, I don't think the Englightenment happened by religion itself 'modernizing' by itself, it happened by Reason gaining more and more ground, and religion being forced to adapt. Modern-day fundamentalism, more than anything, seems to be a religious counteract against that: it's a refusal to adapt to the developments of Reason, by putting religious 'knowledge' above scientific knowledge, and by attaching more value to old religious books than to modern scientific articles.

As for the main difference between Christianity and Islam: I guess the real problems is that the fundamentalist strains are much larger in Islam, and that might even be a result of the Qur'an containing less content that is blatently nonsensical by modern scientific standards than the Bible. IIRC the Qur'an, unlike the Bible, does not contain stuff about things such as "the four corners of the world" and whatnot, and less internal contradictions than the Bible, and Muslims are because of that less forced to come up with things like "Yes, but you shouldn't take that passage literally" and "Yes, but this is superseded by the New Testament and doesn't apply anymore these days", than Christians are. So it appears that, somehow, Muslims are less 'forced' to adapt to modern scientific standards than Christians are. And that, as a result, fundamentalism is a more viable way for Muslims than it is for Christians.

The problem is not that people somehow want to believe in God or go to churches/mosques/whatever. That's perfectly fine with me. The problem is that people attach far too much value to texts that were hundreds or thousands of years ago.
You charge each other for the time and breath it takes to say 'good morning',
But the truth is slowly dawning -- things are getting out of hand,
We all pursue our shattered dreams along the roads to our own ruin --
Watch our empires sink and wash away like castles made of sand.
And so cast off the lies that are your lives and find the truth within.
-- Martin Walkyier

Also, Balrogs have wings.

::.: Homepage .::. last.fm .::. Facebook .::. Flickr :.::

User avatar
Belgarion
Posts: 280
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:30
Location: Istanbul-Freiburg

#41 Post by Belgarion » 06 Apr 2009 13:49

Joost wrote:As for the main difference between Christianity and Islam: I guess the real problems is that the fundamentalist strains are much larger in Islam, and that might even be a result of the Qur'an containing less content that is blatently nonsensical by modern scientific standards than the Bible. IIRC the Qur'an, unlike the Bible, does not contain stuff about things such as "the four corners of the world" and whatnot, and less internal contradictions than the Bible, and Muslims are because of that less forced to come up with things like "Yes, but you shouldn't take that passage literally" and "Yes, but this is superseded by the New Testament and doesn't apply anymore these days", than Christians are. So it appears that, somehow, Muslims are less 'forced' to adapt to modern scientific standards than Christians are. And that, as a result, fundamentalism is a more viable way for Muslims than it is for Christians.
So the superiority of the Qur'an over the Bible in terms of reasonability is also the downfall of it in the long run, since people will question the credibility of its writings even less. As much as this sounds paradoxical, I think it might indeed be the case.
In this world there are two tragedies, one is not getting what one wants and the other is getting it. Oscar Wilde

God gave men a brain and a penis and only enough blood to work one at a time.

Kankra
Posts: 116
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54

#42 Post by Kankra » 07 Apr 2009 23:14

A friend of mine lately remarked how some Muslims/Arabs suck so much because they havent developed toward "an eye for an eye". I found this weird because it immediately reminded me of Ghandi's saying "An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind". What I didnt immediately comprehend was that he was talking about the blood-feuds and vendettas that are so typical for f.e. Turkish and Arabian families/people in Germany. An Eye for an Eye was maybe not the perfect way to go by (forgiveness, as the Christian belief teaches, is probably better in the long run, who knows) , but at least it stops any feuds because debt is paid fairly and reproducibly.

These guys on the other hand will, if a goat of theirs has been stolen, kill the thief, and the thief's family will kill the murderer, and that murderer's family etc etc etc. Murder as an honourable instrument or an intrument to recover honour is something that most Western people do not anymore practice or even consider.

If the Holocaust had happened to any Arabian nation/religious group, they would send suicide bombers to Germany for the rest of eternity.

edit: And it's funny, parts of the Orient were culturally and scientifically superior to the Occident. As late as the crusades, the Europeans were pwned hard by the troups of Saladin. And also in Spain there was a Muslim kingdom that was tolerant, wealthy and knowledgable. Maybe somebody is bored enough to read up on why the decline happened?

User avatar
Joost
Posts: 3799
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Contact:

#43 Post by Joost » 07 Apr 2009 23:27

Kankra wrote:A friend of mine lately remarked how some Muslims/Arabs suck so much because they havent developed toward "an eye for an eye". I found this weird because it immediately reminded me of Ghandi's saying "An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind". What I didnt immediately comprehend was that he was talking about the blood-feuds and vendettas that are so typical for f.e. Turkish and Arabian families/people in Germany. An Eye for an Eye was maybe not the perfect way to go by (forgiveness, as the Christian belief teaches, is probably better in the long run, who knows) , but at least it stops any feuds because debt is paid fairly and reproducibly.

These guys on the other hand will, if a goat of theirs has been stolen, kill the thief, and the thief's family will kill the murderer, and that murderer's family etc etc etc. Murder as an honourable instrument or an intrument to recover honour is something that most Western people do not anymore practice or even consider.

If the Holocaust had happened to any Arabian nation/religious group, they would send suicide bombers to Germany for the rest of eternity.

edit: And it's funny, parts of the Orient were culturally and scientifically superior to the Occident. As late as the crusades, the Europeans were pwned hard by the troups of Saladin. And also in Spain there was a Muslim kingdom that was tolerant, wealthy and knowledgable. Maybe somebody is bored enough to read up on why the decline happened?
Honour killings should be seen separately from Islam, though. They occur only in a small area of the Muslim world, and they occur among non-Muslims in that area too. Also, honour killings are actually forbidden by just about all denominations of Islam IIRC.

To put things into perspective: Southern Italy is an area strongly dominated by Catholic Christianity, and honour killings (commonly known as 'vendetta') still occur there -- even though the Church does not approve of them in any way.
You charge each other for the time and breath it takes to say 'good morning',
But the truth is slowly dawning -- things are getting out of hand,
We all pursue our shattered dreams along the roads to our own ruin --
Watch our empires sink and wash away like castles made of sand.
And so cast off the lies that are your lives and find the truth within.
-- Martin Walkyier

Also, Balrogs have wings.

::.: Homepage .::. last.fm .::. Facebook .::. Flickr :.::

faery
Posts: 1505
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 21:05
Location: nmgn

#44 Post by faery » 08 Apr 2009 08:48

I think many problems mainly attributed to Islam (like the murders for honour mentioned above or female circumcision) should be attributed to culture in a certain region. A lot of the time Christians in those regions do "that bad stuff" too.

Kankra
Posts: 116
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 17:54

#45 Post by Kankra » 08 Apr 2009 09:41

Dats right, I am mostly talking about the culture there, not the religion. People just use the parts of their religion to justify their deeds within their culture.

Luna.Dome
Posts: 306
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 18:01
Location: here
Contact:

#46 Post by Luna.Dome » 08 Apr 2009 10:04

Martin? :|
No'am wrote:
Quoting Antinowhere League's 'So What', I wrote: I drunk that, i drunk this, I've spewed up on a pint of piss....
That's because you drink Heineken
---

User avatar
t.a.j.
Posts: 1459
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 23:29
Location: where ignorant armies clash by night
Contact:

#47 Post by t.a.j. » 08 Apr 2009 10:57

Islam is bad enough without misattributing stuff to it.
http://www.gedichtblog.de
They say that there's a broken light for every heart on Broadway.
They say that life's a game, then they take the board away.
They give you masks and costumes and an outline of the story
Then leave you all to improvise their vicious cabaret...


Still the goddamn Batman.

User avatar
ThePKH
Posts: 1288
Joined: 16 Aug 2002 19:22
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland
Contact:

#48 Post by ThePKH » 11 Apr 2009 22:40

If you reverse the word Allah, you get the finnish word halla. Actually allah comes from this particular word, which stands for "frost". Think about another group of people besides muslims that are obsessed with frost. You guessed it: black metallers. It explains why Allah is such an evil and merciless god.
I still am the terror that flaps in the night!

Wicked Child
Posts: 321
Joined: 02 Mar 2004 06:13
Location: Brazil
Contact:

#49 Post by Wicked Child » 13 Apr 2009 15:20

Didn't catch everything you say, but I saw hard criticizing upon Arab and Eastern world, so let me state something.
Kankra wrote:Atm millions of Chinese people are nothing more than oppressed slaves of the system, earning atrocious salaries while pushing forward the Chinese economy that's reaping in billions of dollars in profit.
I'm afraid that's the reality of most part of the world. Not just Western countries. Since CAPITALISM leads to oppression and atrocious salaries in order to put profits on the elite's pockets. Not defending China either. But the USA and the EU is no far from that, except for the fact that China's population is the bigger on Earth.
Kankra wrote:The oil-rich Arabian countries on the other hand... they just suck. Mostly awfully backward cultures with century-old religious and moralic views, who've - due to religious and political oppression (mostly by their own people) - have contributed nothing, neither intellectually, scientifically nor culturally, during the last centuries.
90% of Western world are Christian. And I think that christianism is nothing but that whay you just said: "century old religious and moralic views". What do you say to me about Sarah Palin? The Pope? Most perfect way to describe religious-dumb and political oppressor. So, you can say that Arab world suck, but I can't agree if you point that as the main reason.

I will read everything and comment aupon further statements.
You're going to hell. But not the cool one, that's where I'll go.
You go to the crappy hell.

Wicked Child
Posts: 321
Joined: 02 Mar 2004 06:13
Location: Brazil
Contact:

#50 Post by Wicked Child » 13 Apr 2009 15:55

Joost wrote:
Belgarion wrote:I don't think Islam itself is to blame, since it was quite modern for 600's, but it's the ignorant attitude of Arabs that can't accept that it's not the answer to their problems anymore.
I guess you are right here. If you take the Bible in one hand and the Qur'an in the other hand, I don't think you can say the contents of the Qur'an are more shocking or 'backwards'. All of the bad stuff that's in the Qur'an (and more) is in the Bible too.

In the end, I don't think the Englightenment happened by religion itself 'modernizing' by itself, it happened by Reason gaining more and more ground, and religion being forced to adapt. Modern-day fundamentalism, more than anything, seems to be a religious counteract against that: it's a refusal to adapt to the developments of Reason, by putting religious 'knowledge' above scientific knowledge, and by attaching more value to old religious books than to modern scientific articles.

As for the main difference between Christianity and Islam: I guess the real problems is that the fundamentalist strains are much larger in Islam, and that might even be a result of the Qur'an containing less content that is blatently nonsensical by modern scientific standards than the Bible. IIRC the Qur'an, unlike the Bible, does not contain stuff about things such as "the four corners of the world" and whatnot, and less internal contradictions than the Bible, and Muslims are because of that less forced to come up with things like "Yes, but you shouldn't take that passage literally" and "Yes, but this is superseded by the New Testament and doesn't apply anymore these days", than Christians are. So it appears that, somehow, Muslims are less 'forced' to adapt to modern scientific standards than Christians are. And that, as a result, fundamentalism is a more viable way for Muslims than it is for Christians.

The problem is not that people somehow want to believe in God or go to churches/mosques/whatever. That's perfectly fine with me. The problem is that people attach far too much value to texts that were hundreds or thousands of years ago.
The problem is worshipping. Instead of learning from Jesus actions and attitudes, people tended to worship HIM and not his IDEAS, and so on.. with all other religious with it`s respective Messiahs. Of course there's always a mastermind behind that. St. Paulo created the Christian Instituition.

Now about science, I must say that, you can't also take this as supreme truth. There are more subjective and emotional issues that are barely understandable even for scientists. A good example is that the magnetism or chemistry were, for a long time, known as metaphysics.
People always forget about HUMAN sciences, such as, Antropology, Philosofy, Sociology and even Economy, when it comes to religious discussions. But they are just as important as Math, Physics, Biology and Chemistry for the understanding of religion and anything else.
There are a lot of valuable thoughts and philosofies inside christianism, islam, budism and other religions. The problem is the MEN speaking as GODS. And the creation of religious instituitions as a tool of manipulating through power.
You're going to hell. But not the cool one, that's where I'll go.
You go to the crappy hell.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests