
- Time
- Post link
I barely remember it either. Probably a self-defense mechanism. I hate when this forum IS TEARING US APART, GAFFER!!!
I barely remember it either. Probably a self-defense mechanism. I hate when this forum IS TEARING US APART, GAFFER!!!
Oh, what a little chicken. Cheep cheep cheep cheep cheep!
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
*Warb pulls 'Cold Steel Recon 1 plain edge spear point assisted opening tactical folding knife' out of pocket, Quickly flips open knife with one hand, tears Gaffer apart with knife*
*I actually do own this knife.
Warbler said:
*Warb pulls 'Cold Steel Recon 1 plain edge spear point assisted opening tactical folding knife' out of pocket, Quickly flips open knife with one hand, tears Gaffer apart with knife*
*I actually do own this knife.
We're expecting!
adywan said:
So America are now prepared to arm the Syrian Rebels because they say that the president has used chemical weapons. I'd be very wary of this. It was a very small amount used. Doesn't this ring alarm bells with anyone? Top experts have warned that these weapons were used by the rebels (the UN's investigator Carla del Ponte informed them about this after her investigation), in order to get the support of other nations and they were not used by Assad. But what's more worrying is that it is known that Al Qaeda is fighting alongside the rebels (same thing as what was happening in Lybia). So, if America start providing this military support, they are in danger of arming those they are supposed to be fighting against.
There are some terrible things happening over there, but is it all that we are being told it is? Rebels executed a 15 year old boy in front of his parents because they claimed he used the profit Muhammad's name in an offensive manner. And we've seen the pictures of the rebels eating one of the government soldiers hearts. Is this really the type of people that we should be helping? Also videos of Rebels training to use chemical weapons surfaced.
I'm hoping the Uk stays well out of this but the chances of that happening are slim to none. Shouldn't we be listening to those independent investigators instead of brushing their reports to one side without any evidence to refute their reports?
And, before any one suggests that this is another Anti-American post by a Brit, it isn't. I'm curious to know what you guys over there think about all this.
For all the angst and opposition many express(ed) about Iraq, without that precedent intervention in places like Libya and Syria would not be so practically expected. As in Libya, we're taking sides in a civil war with the goal of not getting our own hands too literally bloodied. The need for UN approval sounds more quaint than ever before.
An unidentified US administration official is quoted:
“Would we have made [the determination Assad had breached the red line] even if we didn’t have the evidence? Probably.”
My fear is that we are mostly now naively assisting Islamist extremists who, as you say, are exploiting these conflicts to expand their influence (something we also saw in Egypt). If we are going to engage in these conflicts, I think we need to take ownership of the consequences (and try to avoid them).
Dr. Ian Malcolm said:
...so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.
The blue elephant in the room.
Warbler said:
*Warb pulls 'Cold Steel Recon 1 plain edge spear point assisted opening tactical folding knife' out of pocket, Quickly flips open knife with one hand, tears Gaffer apart with knife*
*I actually do own this knife.
Background check on Aisle 5...
The blue elephant in the room.
That looks a bit sinister, at least it's not a gun.
TV's Frink said:
imperialscum said:
TV's Frink said:
Wow, you still can't read!
No offense.
And you still can't write. In proper English it is spelt "offence". :P
Offense intended.
Non taken. Intention failed.
真実
imperialscum said:
TV's Frink said:
imperialscum said:
TV's Frink said:
Wow, you still can't read!
No offense.
And you still can't write. In proper English it is spelt "offence". :P
Offense intended.
Non taken. Intention failed.
"Non taken" LOL
Hey, leave him alone, that's how his pure untainted culture spells it.
adywan said:
So America are now prepared to arm the Syrian Rebels because they say that the president has used chemical weapons. I'd be very wary of this. It was a very small amount used. Doesn't this ring alarm bells with anyone? Top experts have warned that these weapons were used by the rebels (the UN's investigator Carla del Ponte informed them about this after her investigation), in order to get the support of other nations and they were not used by Assad. But what's more worrying is that it is known that Al Qaeda is fighting alongside the rebels (same thing as what was happening in Lybia). So, if America start providing this military support, they are in danger of arming those they are supposed to be fighting against.
There are some terrible things happening over there, but is it all that we are being told it is? Rebels executed a 15 year old boy in front of his parents because they claimed he used the profit Muhammad's name in an offensive manner. And we've seen the pictures of the rebels eating one of the government soldiers hearts. Is this really the type of people that we should be helping? Also videos of Rebels training to use chemical weapons surfaced.
I'm hoping the Uk stays well out of this but the chances of that happening are slim to none. Shouldn't we be listening to those independent investigators instead of brushing their reports to one side without any evidence to refute their reports?
And, before any one suggests that this is another Anti-American post by a Brit, it isn't. I'm curious to know what you guys over there think about all this.
Honestly if we were to get involved, we should have done it a long time ago when there were distinct rebel factions we could support and others we could disregard. Now when we support the rebels, they are a conglomeration of the extremist brand and the better folks. At this point we may be supporting the takeover of a worse regime than the one we've already got. I won't argue with you about that.
darth_ender said:
imperialscum said:
TV's Frink said:
imperialscum said:
TV's Frink said:
Wow, you still can't read!
No offense.
And you still can't write. In proper English it is spelt "offence". :P
Offense intended.
Non taken. Intention failed.
"Non taken" LOL
Oops. I don't know how that E slipped away. :P
真実
Non says :
Kal-El... sounds a bit Semitic. Not sure if ImperialsCum would approve.
imperialscum said:
Okay again.
I do not see benefits of lax immigration policies. I support selective immigration. If a country is in need of a few skilled individuals that is completely okay. But to just accept anyone, especially to do less paid jobs (or even worse, to let them live on the state's social support) just because your own people do not wish to do it, that is stupid and could be even considered as an exploitation.
So... the unwashed masses are okay, as long as we need their skills. So if another country educates and prepares them, us 1st world nations should sweep in an take them and the benefits they create away, consequently taking a job from a skilled native worker? That's not exploitation?
But the economically disadvantaged of another country can't come here and work jobs we wont do? It's exploitative to have them come here and work, that even at the worst levels provides a better lifestyle than they could often hope for in their countries, but that is exploitative?
TheBoost said:
imperialscum said:
Okay again.
I do not see benefits of lax immigration policies. I support selective immigration. If a country is in need of a few skilled individuals that is completely okay. But to just accept anyone, especially to do less paid jobs (or even worse, to let them live on the state's social support) just because your own people do not wish to do it, that is stupid and could be even considered as an exploitation.
So... the unwashed masses are okay, as long as we need their skills. So if another country educates and prepares them, us 1st world nations should sweep in an take them and the benefits they create away, consequently taking a job from a skilled native worker? That's not exploitation?
But the economically disadvantaged of another country can't come here and work jobs we wont do? It's exploitative to have them come here and work, that even at the worst levels provides a better lifestyle than they could often hope for in their countries, but that is exploitative?
Sweep in and take them? What the hell are you on? Lol. Immigrants CHOOSE to come to the UK (as an example) they aren't forced. If (as an immigrant) you want to come here, do nothing, reap all thebenefits (free healthcare, education for kids, welfare) then fucking pay into the system beforehand (5 years at least) through tax and national insurance contributions and THEN you are entitled. Your not just naturally entitled. That's taking the piss.
Bingowings said:
Loved Kenny
Hey, it's me. said:
TheBoost said:
imperialscum said:
Okay again.
I do not see benefits of lax immigration policies. I support selective immigration. If a country is in need of a few skilled individuals that is completely okay. But to just accept anyone, especially to do less paid jobs (or even worse, to let them live on the state's social support) just because your own people do not wish to do it, that is stupid and could be even considered as an exploitation.
So... the unwashed masses are okay, as long as we need their skills. So if another country educates and prepares them, us 1st world nations should sweep in an take them and the benefits they create away, consequently taking a job from a skilled native worker? That's not exploitation?
But the economically disadvantaged of another country can't come here and work jobs we wont do? It's exploitative to have them come here and work, that even at the worst levels provides a better lifestyle than they could often hope for in their countries, but that is exploitative?
Sweep in and take them? What the hell are you on? Lol. Immigrants CHOOSE to come to the UK (as an example) they aren't forced. If (as an immigrant) you want to come here, do nothing, reap all thebenefits (free healthcare, education for kids, welfare) then fucking pay into the system beforehand (5 years at least) through tax and national insurance contributions and THEN you are entitled. Your not just naturally entitled. That's taking the piss.
You might want to read all the words again.
I was in fact replying to the implication that 1st word countries actively seek out skilled people from over countries so they can benefit their own. If skilled workers want to come and contribute then good luck to them and they will be welcomed. Not those out for a free ride off the back of working people in that country who've contributed into the system that pays for it. A few years ago I fell out of work due to redundancy and every benefit I received as a result of that was justified because I'd payed into the system for 20 years+. Why should I be content with unemployed migrants from wherever,whose sole purpose is to come to my country and enjoy the benefits its system offers without at least knowing the basics of the language and willingness to integrate with the local community? Are we all just supposed to say,"Well ya know, life was probably tough and they only want a better life." Bullshit I'm afraid. You don't get nothing for nothing. And that is the harsh reality of life. And your a deluded fool if you think otherwise. Just my opinion.
Who are you responding to? If it's Boost, you need to read again.
TheBoost said:
imperialscum said:
Okay again.
I do not see benefits of lax immigration policies. I support selective immigration. If a country is in need of a few skilled individuals that is completely okay. But to just accept anyone, especially to do less paid jobs (or even worse, to let them live on the state's social support) just because your own people do not wish to do it, that is stupid and could be even considered as an exploitation.
So... the unwashed masses are okay, as long as we need their skills. So if another country educates and prepares them, us 1st world nations should sweep in an take them and the benefits they create away, consequently taking a job from a skilled native worker? That's not exploitation?
But the economically disadvantaged of another country can't come here and work jobs we wont do? It's exploitative to have them come here and work, that even at the worst levels provides a better lifestyle than they could often hope for in their countries, but that is exploitative?
It may be considered in both cases. The difference that in the first case I see the benefit while in other two cases I do not. Especially in the case when it is about living on the state's social support.
And as it was already stated, the country does not seek for immigrants as you suggested. It is just a matter of selection of those who wish to immigrate.
真実
Well if you guys think that lax immigration regulation and no (or inadequate) integration policies is a good thing, I am okay with that and I respect your opinion. But attacking me because I support a more strict immigration regulation and proper integration policies is stupid and disrespectful. Just because I prefer Japan model to UK/Sweden model doesn't make me intolerant. It is you who are intolerant.
真実
We're not the ones who want separate cultures.
imperialscum said:
Well if you guys think that lax immigration regulation and no (or inadequate) integration policies is a good thing, I am okay with that and I respect your opinion. But attacking me because I support a more strict immigration regulation and proper integration policies is stupid and disrespectful. Just because I prefer Japan model to UK/Sweden model doesn't make me intolerant. It is you who are intolerant.
LOL. You're a trip.
Anyway, no, America and the U.K. don't seek out immigrants, but they provide a process for those interested to become part of a selection process, then they select from that pool. So yeah, in a manner of speaking, we do "swoop in and take them". Obviously TheBoost is being figurative, the word "swoop" ought to have tipped you off there. Clearly he didn't mean literally going to their country, flying around like a bird of prey, then swooping down and snatching the ones we want up like a hawk would snatch up a chipmunk. (This is addressed to Imperial and Hey, not just the above quoted text.
I am all about immigration reform in America. The way we do it now is really stupid. We get a lot of worthless people here because one person can win the lottery, immigrate via marriage, become part of the selection process, or come over on a student visa and continue further education long enough to qualify for a green card. From there they can proceed to bring over their entire extended family throughout the course of many years. One useful now well educated immigrant that would be an asset to society could potentially lead to the extra baggage of two elderly parents, a less ambitious sibling along with her two kids and a lazy bum of a husband who contributes nothing. All of them will become citizens given they stay long enough. We might get a new doctor or a culturally diverse college professor out of the deal, but hypothetically this could also lead to two more elderly people drawing social security and another family collecting food stamps and welfare.
Also, I am very aware of the problem of fundamental Islam rapidly seeping into European countries. It is an issue I watch pretty closely, and if you look several pages back in the politics thread, you'll notice I occasionally bring up the issue and post some news stories relating to the subject. In other words, it is something I am concerned enough about to keep up to date on and also to try to make others aware of.
I think a no immigration stance is legit enough as well. I love cultures. My career, when I'm working in it, is heavily related to culture. I have a good deal of cross-cultural experience. A fellow expatriate buddy of mine and I used to talk about America being a salad, when you come to America, you are expected and allowed to be whatever you are. It is like the salad bowl in the middle of the dinner table. Everyone dishes a little bit of it out onto their own plates. They have a plate full of their own main course and sides, and they also have a serving of the salad. As an American, when I travel to or live in other countries, I am expected to blend. If I don't know the language, eyes roll. When I do something culturally unkosher or somehow demonstrate my inevitable ignorance of local norms and mores in some way, big or small, people sigh, "silly American" and shake their heads.
"When in Rome, do as the Romans do; when in The United States, do as you would at home." My buddy and I would lament that while everyone else at the table has their own plates of food, we simply have an empty plate in front of us filled with the same salad in the middle of the table that everyone else is dishing up freely. We were stuck in a culturally devoid expanse, looking at all this rich culture at the table around us, but only able to smell its delicious odors and watch others enjoy it as we slowly munched on our bland salad. This is why we were both expatriates, why we both sought out and seized opportunities to immerse ourselves in these foreign worlds. Even if those other dishes could never be ours, we wanted to surround ourselves with people we could live vicariously through; so we could watch longingly with rumbling stomachs as they partook of their exotic cuisines.
I hated seeing Wal-Mart in Germany and McDonald's in France. I wanted to see these cultures untouched. When in Germany, I wanted to see Germany, not Germany with some America sprinkled on top. When in France I wanted to see France. When in England I wanted to see England and English people, not another melting pot like the States. Unfortunately to a degree (but not all bad), we live in a global world climate and the world is shrinking fast. I'd loved to see European countries hold back the night and maintain their own identities. So don't misunderstand me, we have far more in common on this topic than you think.
About five years ago while living State side for what I planned on only being a very short period of time, the same old friend of mine that I developed the salad analogy with so many years before happened to cross paths with me again and we became room mates for a time. Each evening and weekend we'd find some trouble to get into or drink ourselves silly and talk linguistics, politics, women, travel, culture, and about how badly we needed to get back outside of our own borders. I began noticing how aloof and out of touch my friend was, and then realized I was pretty much looking in a mirror. We could bring home women, but could never maintain relationships; we could make fun and interesting acquaintances and have a good time with them, but could never establish real friendships. In my own country of origin I felt like Data from TNG, looking at the things around me with puzzlement and bemused. I finally got a long awaited job offer overseas, and proceeded to unceremoniously decline it. If I was eating the same salad as everyone around me, why did I feel so out of touch and disconnected from them? I decided it was time to stop looking at the United States like an outsider, and see what I could do about seeing it from the inside.
Since then I have lived in four different states, and moved into a new living situation every several months. I have had tons of room mates since then of various social and economic statuses, ethnicities, and ideologies. Every few months I hit up Craig's List for a new interesting short term living situation. That is why I live in the part of town I do at the moment, and why I work a job way below my pedigree. I've even been homeless and jobless for periods of time. The month of January of this year was spent living in my car, and sometimes going days without food or a shower, I had several good reasons for doing this, but ultimately I did it just to see what it would be like.
Turns out, I do have a warm meal on my plate hidden underneath that salad. Surprisingly America has a lot more culture than I ever gave it credit for, and while a lot of that culture is still distasteful to me, some of it is pretty nifty. More amazing still, I don't even know a fraction of it. All the places I've lived have been extremely different in their own ways. It is really kind of crazy, actually.
Back to the no immigration stance. It is perfectly legit you hold that view. Wanting your country and culture preserved is valid. I still stand by all the other stuff I have said before, and I find some of the ways you expressed it to be a bit distasteful. The reality is you do have these human beings coming into your country, addressing the situation with the attitude you have isn't going to change anything, it makes you sound small, and historically that kind of attitude has brought with it all sorts of trouble, grief, and perpetuated ill feelings. But you make an excellent point: Who am I to judge you? Nobody. The things I have said are just my opinions, and they very well could be totally out of line or just plain wrong. For the last few years I feel like I've learned so much with each passing year; and all this has done for me is shown me, in no small way, that I know so very little.