logo Sign In

Go-Mer-Tonic

User Group
Members
Join date
13-Sep-2006
Last activity
28-Mar-2007
Posts
928

Post History

Post
#265076
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/265076/action/topic#265076
Time
So because we get perks as US citizens, we should just accept the fact that out president invaded a country with false information as the main reason for doing so?

It suddenly becomes so clear now. I should just shut my compassionate mouth and become more selfish.

Screw everyone else, I have a fire department.
Post
#264541
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/264541/action/topic#264541
Time
Originally posted by: WESHALLPRESERVE
I don't have respect for defeatests that claim they are on the same sides as humanity, nor do I have no resepct for people that say that their religion calls for the death of anyone that is not associated with it.
So, you claim to be a defeatest when it comes to not killing, that you have to kill them before they kill you. Which is pretty much advocating the killing of people who do not share -your- beliefs.

I can see the point about killing someone in self defense. My point is we ended up acting on the paranoid assumption (one the was never substantiated) that they had weapons of mass destruction.

At what point is it "obvious" that we need to defend ourselves?

Post
#264264
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/264264/action/topic#264264
Time
Originally posted by: Wookie Wedgie
The invasion of Iraq was a criminal act on the part of the governments of the US and the UK and I don't think the people behind those actions should be allowed to get away with it.

Iraq's invasion of Quait was a criminal act.
Iraq's leader's hate for the US and its allies was a criminal act.
Saddam's misleading inspectors was a criminal act.
Saddam killing hundreds of thousands of his OWN people was a criminal act.
Saddam conspiring against the US was a criminal act.
Saddam's support, aiding, and abetting of KNOWN terrorists was a criminal act.
Saddam's support an ideal that is destructive and terrorists is criminal!

If I recall correctly, US and UK were going off of reports that may have been flawed, but it was not a misleading. We and the UK were acting off information it was going on. Blair mislead no one. He was going off information provided.

You go on, you continue not to vote... or go ahead and vote for the wrong people, because your country is doomed anyway. The more you continue to appease that Muslim population, the more your own freedoms will slip, and then soon you'll be afraid to express any opinion at all when the Muslims start to slay people for differing opinion. I'm glad I don't live there.

As for labels. If you don't label something, how the hell are you suppose to know what you're up against? I know you liberals hate the label, but it's what you are. Deal with it. I'm a conservative! I'm a conservative Republican! Let me go full bore: I'm a CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN! AND I'M FUCKING PROUD OF IT!! Why are you so afraid of labels. You give them all the time. "Conservative" is suppose to be an insult in the mass media. African Americans are proud to be African Americans, when actually, they're JUST Americans like they should be. Give it a rest. I can't go around constantly calling terrorist: "Extra-national individuals who do not hold our values in any regard and would prefer to stick a pipebomb up our asses." I'd like to, but that's awfully long, and I prefer 'terrorist.'


Yeah Saddam propogated criminal acts too, I don't see how that makes the criminal acts of the US and UK all fine and dandy.

To me criminal acts are criminal acts.
Post
#263999
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263999/action/topic#263999
Time
I don't think anyone is contesting that Han had a right to shoot him because it was clear Greedo meant to kill him.

It's just I don't think that was clear to everyone, and I could see why Lucas would prefer to make it as clear as possible.

8 year olds will have a much more observant and attentive mind than most people who are older.

Truly wonderful the mind of a child is.
Post
#263975
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263975/action/topic#263975
Time
If you omit the subtitles, all you get is "over my dead body".

I'm saying that a lot of people out there just either aren't quick enough or don't care to read subtitles.

I know I have talked to my fair share of SW fans who thought Han did kill Greedo in cold blood. They would tell me that's what makes Han better than Luke.
Post
#263967
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263967/action/topic#263967
Time
You misunderstood my analogy, C3PX.

I was saying that the second the big brute is brandishing a weapon it's a whole other matter, and in that case homicide in self-defense is justified.

I'm just saying what we did to Iraq was just declare they were brandishing a wepon, and now it turns out that was an inaccurate assumption on our part.

That's like killing the big guy in a bar who has only verbally threatened you, and telling the police later you thought he was pointing a gun at you.

As far as Han/Greedo, you misunderstood my point there too. I agree that Greedo was pointing a gun at him and telling Han flat out that he planned on killing him, which made Han's first shot entirely justifiable.

The reason I understand why Lucas changed it, is because I could see how a lot of people could have missed the subtitles, and without that, it's not entirely clear the intent was to kill Han, Greedo could have just been trying to "bring him in" for his bounty.

So while I think it was fine originally for me, I could understand why Lucas would want to clarify that better. I know I have heard from a lot of people who were saying Han was cool because he didn't let morals get in his way. If I were Lucas and I heard enough of that, I might think things needed to be clarified too.
Post
#263932
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263932/action/topic#263932
Time
Well I appreciate why Lucas felt he needed to clarify that Greedo was intending to kill Han.

If the big guy is pointing a gun at you, and telling you that the idea is to see you dead, I think that's justification enough.

But I can also see how that point could be lost on people who don't bother reading subtitles. Without the subtitles, Greedo might just be taking Han in, not intending to kill him.
Post
#263926
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263926/action/topic#263926
Time
Certainly in matters of self defence, I would say that killing isn't always morally deficient. If someone rushes you with a knife, and you hit them over the head with something heavy enough to stop them dead, that seems justified to me.

On the other hand, seeing a huge guy in the bar who keeps looking in your direction and insulting you under his breath, even saying that he would love to see you dead, isn't a good enough reason to go over there and hit him over the head with something that could kill him. Now the second that guy rushes you with a weapon brandished, kill away and feel good about it.

To me that's the fundamental reason why the way we went about invading Iraq was morally unjustified.

Now does that mean I'm saying Saddam was a great guy? No. But it's the principal of the matter.

Tiptup, I think it was you who said the war should have been for oil instead of the search for possible weapons of mass destruction. I don't agree with that either, because it operates on the assumption that if Iraq was allowed to spend their own natural resources on weapons, they could become a bigger threat to the US. Again it's a pre-emptive action that we take because it's possible that Iraq will eventually attack the US.

To me that makes us a guy who went over to the large guy talking smack about us in the bar and killed him just to take his wallet. Telling the bartender: "Well it's obvious he would have just used this money to buy a knife and stab me to death, so I had to do what I had to do."
Post
#263703
Topic
Global Warming
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/263703/action/topic#263703
Time
Exactly, you really should just take it easier. I'm not the one getting all bent out of shape here, I can take the "heat" just fine.

I agree with the dangers of acting on mass hysteria instead of true knowledge.

He isn't saying that Global Warming is just mass hysteria, he's saying that he thinks some of it certainly is, and cautions us to stick to the facts on the matter.