Aileron

Its not gullibility...large economic forces such as the prices of commodities are beyond anybody's control. Besides, I was talking about the supply moreso than prices. Unless Bush has a magic wand with which he can conjure up oil deposits I think the recent discovery has nothing to do with Republicans seeking re-election. TeHsu, we aren't talking about the policy of the entire Islamic world, this is about Iran's policy. Their official policy is indeed wipeing Israel off the map. And we are innocent from creating terrorists because most of the root causes occured before this country was founded. When Bin Laden talks about re-conquering Andalucia from Christian rule, what could we possibly do to negotiate with that? (BTW "Andalucia" is known in the modern world as Spain) Don't get me wrong, the US isn't innocent, but most of these problems were created by the Mongols and the Ottomans, and the Middle East has advanced so slowly that these problems simply haven't been solved yet.

Actually its more !@#$%^&*anine Astro, the Nazis atleast settled for other European nations to surrender. These extremists stand for TOTAL annihilation of all that do not share their views. The suicide bomber mentality is the complete opposite of the "live and let live" policy held by sane people, for the suicide bomber hates his enemy more than he loves his life. Its amazing though considering that huge oil deposit found in the Gulf of Mexico. Now oil prices are down and Iran's stance is starting to soften.

Oh, I was just testing. Ofcourse I'm too experienced and 1337 to lose my password and too forum savvy to overlook the Tech FAQs. You passed MMav

Alright, this is embarrasing, but I lost my password and like all old-skool players I started playing before that automatic password recovery feature was added. Who exactly can access passwords and would be able to help me out?

Furthermore I'd say the at!@#$%^&*ude of "let them advance on their own and fight for their own freedom" is the easy way out. It isn't necessarily the best thing for the people caught in the corrupt antiquated societies, but is the easiest thing for us to do politically because it does not require us to make a decision. Astro, I would like to dissagree about communism though. Poor people don't resort to communism. Its usually started by low-end intellectuals - typically students of philosophy, political science, and the arts. Back to my previous point and to the topic though, Kurdistan would indeed quickly turn into another Israel. We would most likely create the region out of Kurdish territory in Iraq. Immeadiately, Iran, being the racist xenophobes that they are, would attack the nation in whichever way they could get away with it. Kurdistan would fight back, and with the US's support, would kick Iran's !@#$%^&*. They would use the opportunity to scoop up Kurdish occupied territory in Iran, using "land barrier" as an excuse. Then, it would be a neverending cycle of terrorist action and ineffectual peace deals. The good news is that Iran would be too distracted with Kurdistan to care about Israel, so Hezbollah's and Hamas' funds would go dry. Also, the territory Kurdistan would be created from has oil, so maybe the EU and possibly even the UN would support the nation.

What can I say? He's right about all those points as long as you don't magnify insignificant details. Its nice to see you actually watched or read his speech from the source...Bush makes a lot more sense as a primary source than when mentioned by a secondary source.

Its arrogant to think like that. You and I are not massively smarter than the 250 other million people in the country. The US is a superpower, but not God. The government can't, for instance, make Carribean states immune to hurricanes. We also can't do a 20 year society changing occupation in 4 years. The US is smart and educated enough to do what we have to, the problem is only that reality is that you can't always get what you want. As for Africa, nobody cares about Africa because that continent is contained. Also, there is no problem with imposing ones values of right and wrong on somebody else - provided your !@#$%^&*essment on the issue is correct (in the absolute sense, not just in your opinion). The cost of waiting this our is enormous - unless they are miraculously smarter than Europe it will take centuries and millions of lives for them to advance on their own. The costs of imposition on the other hand only take decades and thousands of lives. The African Union should be given an opportunity to solve this problem themselves. If they can't, the world powers should intervene as soon as forces are available. For now, Iran is much more important. Well, the fighting between the Sunnis and Shiite isn't really enough for a civil war - maybe its enough to form a terroristic underground but it isn't really popular enough to take over the halls of the government. What the Kurds are really fighting for is first class citizenship though, and many think that a purely Kurdish territory is necessary for that. The only problem with a Kurdistan is that essentially means making a second Israel which the neighbors are going to attack, the Europeans turn their back on, leaving the US supporting the fledgling nation and getting blamed for any conflict that arises.

Well, you notice how he tries to find philisophical meanings of song lyrics? Like so: We're Knights of the Round Table We dance whene'er we're able We do routines with chorus scenes With footwork impeccable We dine well here in Camelot We eat ham and jam and Spam a lot We're Knights of the Round Table Our shows are formidable But many times we're given rhymes That are quite unsingable We're opera mad in Camelot We sing from the diaphragm a lot In war we're tough and able Quite indefatigable Between our quests we sequin vests And impersonate Clark Gable It's a busy life in Camelot I have to push the pram a lot Then he'd point out the health benefits of the ham/jam/Spam diet, reasons why one should idolize Clark Gable, the benefits of tap-dancing on top of cats, why one should continue clapping along even if you are strung up by a chain, etc.

Delic is the 1337est player in 17th that never comes out of spectator mode.

Hey, Hezbollah is Iran's tool and no-one else's. Well, here we go again with the ceasefire and UN peacekeepers...maybe they will succeed for once, but I'm not counting on it.

Well, the people who died on 9/11 had jobs, something the typical SS player does not have.

Oh, I must mention that they disproved explosive decompression on MythBusters, so terrorists would have to do more that blow a tiny hole in the side of the airplane. I honestly think this was Hezbollah's international !@#$%^&*ets rather than Al Queda.

There is a point in arguing religion...one's religion affects one's behavior in this world. Generally, the major difference between Christians is that Catholics believe in works, Protestants in faith, and Calvanists in grace. This difference causes a fundimental difference in mindset of these groups. Calvanists, with the main and most offshoot denominations extinct, believed that God decided who his chosen were regardless of any action of the person. This caused them to not look inward but outward at to blame others..creating the mindset that caused the witch trials. Catholics believe in works, which causes each individual to look inward and mind themselves rather than others. This mindset, along with an absolutely overwhelming political background incomprehensible by modern people, caused the corruption as the non-corrupt clergy were reluctant to condem the sins of others. (Most of the things Catholics are blamed for though - the Inquisition, the Conquistadors, Holy Wars - were actually actions of one secular government of Spain who liked to hijack religion as propaganda due to them being so weak as to not be able to control their armies otherwise.) I believe in works. They simply prove faith. One can claim they follow God however much they wish...they only do so in actuality if their actions follow suit. Back to the topic, as Astro said marriage has been around a very long time. In a way, the tradition pre-exists humanity. In general, the reasons for traditions that old are very fundimental and should not be messed with lightly. Marriage and family go hand in hand, and family is the building block of society. If we use the analogy literally, let us view traditional marriage family as a square brick, gay marriage family as a triangular brick, and and a brick wall as a society made up of many families. Now, in and of itself, there is nothing wrong with a triangular brick. Furthermore, if you wanted to construct a wall with them, you could. What you can't do however is take an already existing square-brick wall, knock out a few square bricks and fill the space with triangular ones. Well, maybe you could do so in a few spaces, but such occurrances would weaken the structure and the wall could only tolerate so many. The only way one could construct a wall containing both square and triangular bricks is to segregate the patterns, having one wall of square bricks and another wall out of triagular. (And before you make the racial comparison...families of other races are different colored bricks, and multi-ethnic families are multi-colored bricks.) Gay families simply do not fit in with traditional ones. Oh...and while the Romans practiced homosexuality they never practiced gay marriage.

Well, its war, so "proportionate" isn't really a viable term. Either a nation is at war or it isn't. As for what we do now, we stick to the plan. We finish off whatever is left in Iraq and then we deal with Iran or North Korea. (If Iran is next, we won't pull out troops from Iraq to home, but rather use Iraq as a staging area, so it would appear as if we were going into Iran before solving all the problems in Iraq.) We would likely open up the oil reserves while going into Iran, so oil won't ultimately be the deciding factor. The problem with Iran is first off they have a good air force (versus Iraq that had a penchant for oversized ineffective artillery), so it won't be easy. However, the major problem is that virtually the entire civilian populace has pledged themselves and suicide bombers, making occupation near impossible. Its very similar to the situation in Japan at the end of WWII, so massive conventional bombing would work. The atomic bombings' goal was not to terrorise, but rather to de-fanaticise. When a population develops a death culture in which death is glorified, showing them what death looks like in real life can take them out of the euphoria. This solution should clearly be saved until everything else is tried though. What I'd suggest is that either the US or the international community forcibly dismantle Al-Jazeera and replace it with translated versions of western media companies. If it meant preventing a war I'd say imposing some "propaganda" would be a much lesser of two evils. Really though, there are certain things the UN needs to do though: 1) Create an international definition of "terrorist" and outline punishment procedures. Since terrorists are worse than spies, I'd recommend a capital charge, though I'd also point out that a terrorist is a terrorist based upon what they do, not the organization they belong to. Barring the deaths on the planes themselves, I'd say of the Sept 11th pilots those that flew into the Pentagon were spies, those that would have attacked the White House would-be !@#$%^&*!@#$%^&*ins, and only those who flew into the World Trade Center are actuall terrorrists. 2) Come up with a better stick than "economic sanctions". The nations that get them are already poor and isolated, so its not much of a loss. Furthermore we typically can't stomach the populace of these countries set further into poverty, so we then turn around and send them humanitarian aide witch counteracts the effects of the sanctions. 3) Recognize situations where nations are supporting peace with rogue states for economic gain.

Well...good on them.

People, everyong here should know everyone else's political disposition by now, so limit the name calling. Well, truth be told, if the Lebanese government responded to Israeli aggression, Israel's objectives would be met. If they were to engage the Israeli army, by doing so they would occupy the southern half of their country. All Israel would need to do then is cease hostilities but still keep the forces built up, and suddenly Hezbollah would be sandwhiched betweeen two hostile armies. Lebanon is behaving as if their leadership is being threatened by Hezbollah, mafia style. The last thing Lebanon wants is this type of war, but Hezbollah keeps them in check just enough so that they can't make aggressive moves either way. Hezbollah's actions seems to be devoted to sacrificing Lebanon to their Jihad, which wouldn't make sense unless they are the puppets of Iran. The history of all Israeli conflicts repeats itself though: Israel at internationally sanctioned peace with neighbors. Terrorist groups attack during peacetime. Israel gives up on peace and goes after terrorists - International community supports them. Israel accidentally kills civilians - International community calls for ceasefire. International community installs a premature ceasefire that doesn't deal with the undlying causes of terrorism. repeat Now the underlying cause is Iran, so any true peace plan would deal with Iran first and foremost. Terrorist groups are small and can dissolve and reform elsewhere in a matter of months, so chasing them is typically an excersise in futility. Syria is also not a real problem because terrorist groups are so easy to supply that one does not need a land bridge to finance them. The reapeated problem opposing peace here is that the international community typically is unwilling to deal with rogue sovereign nations and is far more willing to attack terrorist groups who are much easier political targets. The current conflict could hypothetically have been prevented if the US went into Iran rather than Iraq. The foreign policy shown by the administration was to identify nations which were and are a danger to the international community due to the inevitability of globalization, namely Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. These nations were always violent and xenophobic, but pre-globalization they didn't have the technology to affect anyone other than their closest neighbors. Then, the policy is to dismantle those regimes one by one. The next step was to randomly pick one. Of the three Bush chose the easiest political target to deal with first, figuring he would get much more domestic and international support going against Iraq rather than the others. In 20/20 hindsight, it might have been better for Bush to go into Iran first.

Well, Israel is out of diplomatic options, so what do you expect? They've tried giving up their own territory, something no other nation has done ever, and what did they get? The territories in Lebanon and Gaza that they gave up to pacify their enemies are now the bases that their enemies are striking at them from. You must understand that Israel's interests are opposite your own. You people view Isreal's existence as "Yankee Imperialism" and thus your long term hope is Israel's destruction. Israel however wants to survive. Hezbollah will accept nothing short of total territorial and populace concessions. They cannot be negotiated with by any rational means of diplomacy. Since an unjust war occurs when there are no practical alternatives to war, could anyone here name an alternative Israel has that could stop Hezbollah that hasn't already been disproven? Israel has destroyed 50% of Hezbollah's infrastructure and reduced attacks by 70% with just artillery and airstrikes. Its true that its unlikely Israel would be able to completely destroy all the terrorists, but they could do a lot. Really though, Israel's true demands are that the Lebanese government do something as "difficult" as occupy their own country. I watched the Lebanese Amb!@#$%^&*ader to the UN state that it "isn't that simple". Maybe so, but I think the first step in the "complicated" solution would be for Lebanon to atleast try to stop Hezbollah. My hopes is that Lebanon will be rallied just enough to fortify their southern border to brace for the Israeli invasion, which would sandwhich Hezbollah between two hostile armies. But, its clear though that both Hamas and Hezbollah were and are nothing but puppets of Iran. There is no other reason for Hezbollah to strike now other than to take pressure off Iran. According to most of the experts I've read, the problem here is Iran and Syria. I dissagree about Sryia. While it is the land that connects Iran to Lebanon and Palistine, learning from the history of the Vietnam War and the Ho Chi Min trail points out that while large armies can be defeated by attacking the supply lines, small terrorist cells require such few supplies that the supply lines can shift all over the place and still get enough supplies through. Mosy likely even if Syria were supporting us 100% smugglers would still get past them. What needs to be done is to cut off the supply line at the only point that is fixed - Tehran. We should really take out Iran now because its clear that war is inevitable and we should deal with this now before it gets worse.

Sorry for my long than usual absence...I've been pretty busy this summer. All acts of war are responded to by disproportionate force. Lebanon isn't being invaded over the lives of a few soldiers. Lebanon is being invaded because they dared to violate the sovreign rights of a neighboring country with an act of blatent aggression. All wars in history were ignited by events that were smaller in cost than the war that followed. Its merely the fact that one nation cannot afford to let another nation get away with it due to long term consequences. Basically, if Israel just let Lebanon capture their soldiers without reprisal, that would encourage them and others to do it again and again until the cost of complacency rises until its above the cost of the war. I just have to wonder what the Lebanise consider as the lofty reason for bringing this upon themselves. Couldn't they have just done the smart thing and leave Israel alone?

Pfft...national guard troops is a short term solution, and an improvement on ~no~ solution. That's what I hate about politicians. Other than Bush they have a tendancy to do nothing, because when they do something their policies are criticised.

Well, if you burn a cross, you can't expect to walk into a church and have the Priest like you for it. Its the same thing here really. I don't get it...people do radical actions to be counter-cultural and then turn around and wonder why mainstream culture doesn't like them. As for flag burning, it really is in the grey area in freedom of speech. On old cowboy saying is "don't get to cutting the branch that you are standing on." Its foolish to criticise the first amendment while demanding its protection. Flag burning indirectly does this, because doing so is an act of contempt against our democracy and our cons!@#$%^&*ution.

SeVeR, I believe in tolerating the opinions of others, but that comment goes too far. If you had any knowledge on the subject you would know that the Vatican has opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning and that the legacy of the late Pope John Paul II has been one of peace. That comment simply amounts to libelous religious bigotry. And you have it wrong, the top four political issue for Catholics in the US, in order of decreasing importance are: Abortion, Income Distribution, Peace, Gay Marriage Admittingly, you wrote "Christians", and other denominations do have other priorites. Though the fact that Rebuplicans are using this to rally their support goes without contest...I find it amusing that the democrats make that "accusation", because if you think about it, that's how democracy is supposed to work.

.... Its wrong for the 14-15 yr olds too. People have a tendancy to do stupid things when they are young. Unless they can take care of themselves economically there's no way they can take care of themselves sexually. That means they should be out of high school, working full-time, and reside by themselves before being expected to make responsable sexual decisions. Otherwise they will likely make mistakes they will regret for their whole life.

People seem to set the US to one standard and despotic nations to another lower standard. For instance, when a US soldier lets a dog get close to a prisoner, that's considered an international incident of prisoner abuse. However, when an insurgent slices off a civilian prisoner's head with a dull machete, that's somehow not considered cruel. Iran is one of those nations that everyone expects little of. They can threaten to wipe Israel "off the map" and launch missile strikes on Kurdish sections of Iraq annually, actions that the international community would not let the US get away with, but because people have gotten so used to the idea that Iran is a despotic nation their expectations for Iran is so low that they consider such actions acceptible. I mean, you hate it when the Ten Commandments is posted on a courthouse because it violates separation between Church and State (that's not actually a law, but...) Iran on the other hand is a complete theocracy, with neither a Church nor a State but with a corrupt conglameration of the two. Just a couple weeks ago Iraqi civilians pledged themselves en masse to be suicide bombers for the Jihadist cause. The only deterrent to nuclear war thus far has been the fact that nations strong enough to have nukes needed societies advanced enough to not want to die in the cause of hatred. Basically, they would rather let the other guy survive so that they could themselves live rather than get everyone killed. Iran isn't like that. If it were up to the civilians alone, they would rather have everyone dead. If Iran had nukes, they would use them. I know its hard to believe since the Middle East has been a haven for so many despots for so long, but things don't have to be this way. We don't have to accept Iran as a despotic nation, and as a matter of fact in our modern world with our modern weapons, we cannot afford to. We can bring about change. Doing so would be long and difficult, because we have a long history of despots in the area. However, when it is over, the gains, a world nearly completely free of despotism, in which every citizen of humanity doesn't have to live under the thumb of some dictator, is worth the price. I don't think the US is going to do this one alone however. Most of Europe is beginning to understand what the War on Terror is about, that while the fight will be long and the cost is high, the free world really has no choice in the matter.

Okay, its officially started then. Rules and background have been posted in the other topic, so I'll I'll put here is the intro. Remember this is a somewhat serious RPG, though not so serious that you shouldn't have fun. (Intro is best viewed with the starfield skin while slowly scrolling down to music) Bar Wars Episode 1: The Pirate Menace It is a time of uneasy peace. The four powers of the galaxy are in a state of cold war. Powers on all sides plot to tip the scales in their favor. The KANATIS ALLIANCE, a handful of systems wedged between the ITHKUL and TERRAN territories is steadfast in their determination to maintain both the balance and their survival. In the center of this territory, the 17TH PARALLEL BAR run by the famous MANUS CELAR DEI is a haven for military affairs and incognito dealings, attracting bounty hunters, spies, smugglers and more. Placed on the Tau Ceti station placed tactically around a black hole, it is a stop along the primary route connecting Terran and Ithkul space. In the part few months, pirates have begun attacking the trade routes in Kanatis space. The frequency and ferocity of their attacks have had a major impact on shipping. The Kanatis Army, composed of the most elite units in the galaxy, has startlingly had no success in tracking the pirates, and vague rumors speak of some hidden power who sponsor these pirates in secret. Little does the alliance know that a handful of freelancers in the 17th Parallel Bar will both stop these pirates and uncover the deeper plot behind them.

I guess some more details in the descriptions couldn't hurt though: Human: duh Cyborg: A human whose body is partially composed of artificial organs or muscles. Generally one is not regarded as a cyborg if they have one or two small cybernetic implants. Only if the person has some large mechanical device are they considered a cyborg. There are many types of cosmic rays and EMP interference from devices which can disable the cybernetic devices. For that reason most major armies except the Kanatis don't use cyber-soldiers. Genetically Modified Human: A human who's genes have been substancially manipulated in order to increase their performance. Again, a person is not regarded as a GM human if the modification is only minor. It is important to note that while a GM human may be stronger or faster, they still must obey the laws of physics and biology. Their metabolism must increase proportionally, requireing them to consume vast amounts of food, water, and oxygen. For this reason they are banned from worlds with limited resources and major armies do not use GM humans to avoid supply problems. Android: Technically an android is a artifically intelligent robot with human shape, but over the years it has been politically correct to referr to any sentient artificial intelliegence, even those without a body at all, as an android. They are affected by interference even more so than cyborgs and must be especially carefull. Genetic Creation: The process for creating a GM human involves taking human DNA and changing it. Genetic Creations on the other hand involve starting from scratch and thus only master geneticists can even attempt it. Even with a team of experts, creating a lifeform still comes down to luck and there is no consistent method for creating these life-forms. They have the same weakness as GM humans only moreso due to their artifically designed metabolism. Living machine: In attempts to controll what comes out of their experiment, sometime researchers design life-forms that require cybernetic parts to function. The abilities of these motley creations are virtually unlimited, though they have all the weakness of both the androids and the genetic creations. Oh, and for weapons: Ballistic weapons: Guns...they shoot bullets Plasma Weapons: Shoots superheated Ionized Gas...interfers with mechanical systems, so is additionally effective against cyborgs, androids, and living machines. Beta Weapons: Shoots a high-density field of Beta Particles...has a side effect of messing up genetic code, so they are additionally effective against GM humans, GCs, and LMs.