logo Sign In

Kingsama

User Group
Members
Join date
21-Sep-2004
Last activity
5-Dec-2012
Posts
270

Post History

Post
#73029
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73029/action/topic#73029
Time
IMHO i think you are downplaying a lot of the human rights violations in iraq, i think the Kurds would viamently disagree with you here.

But i agree that there is no longer term gain in sudan, and that there is a 90% chance that the US will not get involved. I wish that we would, but a las i suppose the gov has bigger fish to fry. I would argue that there are a mulitude of non oil economic postitives that will come out of iraq, but i agree on not letting this detriorate into an iraq argument thread. The saddest thing is that i dont think either canidate really cares about the situation. Even sadder still is that the UN wont do anything about it either.
Post
#73008
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73008/action/topic#73008
Time
i few comments,

On upgrading technology, i dont necessarially mean making them more powerful. THe idea of high number of bombs built decades sitting ago about scares me, i think the general technology needs to be uprgraded, and old bombs need to be decommitioned.

On WWIII, i think it is ludacrous to assume that all of man kind would be distroyed. Large cities, military installations, capital, ect. yes, the middle of no where no. The enviroment would certainly suffer if everyone went balls out and distroyed everyone else there would still be enough people and nature around to kick the world back into motion.


On liberal vs. conservative.

I do belive that there is a strong presence in the media that could be called liberal. The problem i see with our discussion is that the word liberal now careers a much different meaning than it did some 15 or so years ago. Both terms have becomes the other parties dirty little words for the other as opposed to there traditional meanings. There are much different conotations now to both words.

Sudan is an interesting subject, the question i would pose to all here is what would happen if the US and a coalition did something about it? By and large Iraq 2 1/2 years ago is a comperable place to modern Sudan, but no one seems to care that peoples lives are better there, due to political overtones. So lets say that G. Bush decides to pull something like CLinton TRIED to do in samalia and pulls it off, unlike clinton did. How would the world react?

Edit: Some links

Conservatism
Liberalism
Post
#72829
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72829/action/topic#72829
Time
it would be naive to say that money doesnt effect the presidency, we have had zero poor/middle class pres. But to state that Conservative lobbiest have more power than liberal lobbiest is also naive. If the defense contractors are so powerful why did clinton get in? That guy slashed the military budget...

As for you link. Somewhat entertaining, but I have seen recent studies that show pro kerry article and pro bush article being compared. on Fox it was like 60/40 bush, on other networks, ABC, CNN, NY times, CBS, NBC, the splits ranged from 65/35 to 85/15 for kerry. A majority of TV and Print media is liberal biased, where as Audio aka radio is generally Conservative.
Post
#72817
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72817/action/topic#72817
Time
As i have said before, i have no problem with upgrading technology, as long as there are no more bombs built. AKA replacing old technology. I am full on in favor of scrapping most of our nukes, it is redundant to have them, not to mention to pay for their upkeep. But i agree full nuclear disarmerment is a great idea, but not plausable. That would be like disarming the military and police. The quasi good will generally follow the rules, but the bad, never will...


edited:

There would still be plenty of funding for Defense contractors even if new nukes werent built. There is a laudry list of new technologies being developed that have nothing to do with nuclear bombs... Further more, i again see no problem updating technologies, while dumbing/disarming old ones. I think a decent solution is to continuely replace and disarm old technology.



And no one bought the presidency, there were many studies done by independant news sources that backed the Electoral COllege, and the supreme court. One of which was done by CNN, which is by no means a concervative entity...
Post
#72794
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72794/action/topic#72794
Time
Shimraa:

The problem with clean bombs is that they are usable bombs. One of the biggest reasons governments dont use Nukes is that fall out is terrible, and if you nuke your neighbor it will inevitably hurt you. Where as if you detinate a "clean" bomb that side effect is gone, and the bomb will most likely be used.


Ricarleite:

millions of people didnt die in the bombings, there werent even a million people in combined population of those cities.

check these sites:
Avalon project

Some other site.

that second site is actually a anti drop site, so you dont claim i am dropping biased information.

The estimate the casualties top be between 200.000 and 400,000
And not that all of the people were "innocent" there were military instalations at both locations, thats why they were choosen.

I say all of this not to come across as happy about the bombings, but to put it context.

As far as the surrender goes, my question is why didnt they do it, IIRC the US told them what was gonna go down, claiming to drop a new bomb on a different city every 3 days until Japan surrendered. Luckily they bought our bluff after two, seeing thats all we had, and surrendered.

As for the people that are proud of such things, that is the reason we need bombs, if some crazy moron who thinks like that take power and has access to nukes, some other not so bad guy needs access to them to hold them in check...
Post
#72705
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72705/action/topic#72705
Time
Yeah it scares me too...

I meant to add this to the last post, but it slipped my weary mind (worked 9 hours and skipped lunch, brain no liky).

I wish the us would get rid of a vaste majority of its nuclear weapons, as it stands we have enough to distroy the world several times over. We should retain enough to keep MAD up, and scrap the rest.

good point DC...

and you too warb. As much of a nut many of you think Bush is, he is heaven compared to most other word leaders...

Nothing more...
Post
#72661
Topic
Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72661/action/topic#72661
Time
Essencially i see no problem with continued research and upgrading of the current supply of nukes aka not making more bombs. I for one i suppose am jaded and all, but i dont think that certain world leaders concern themselves with building nukes, just because the US, or any other country has them, merely just to add to there own power. I certainly dont think Kim Jong Il, a man that is starving the majority of his own people, cares if anyone else has the nukes or not. But again maybe i am just jaded...

On a different note, a few years back while in school i remeber my US history prof sliding a grid on the overhead projector that illustrated the last "major" disarmerment treaty. Basically imagine a 8 1/2 by 11 piece of graphing paper filled up with dots, the dots representing 10 kilitons a pieace. Now image a circle with a 3/4" circumfrance surrounding some dots, this represents the disarmerment. Now if you are still with me imagine a 1/2" square, this repressents that amount of nuclear power to distroy earth population. Sad when you think about it, there are enough bombs on this earth to distroy the world 10 + times. I dont know anyone who likes this, but i know a lot of people who are thankful that we (US) have them, many of the people chatting on the board may not be here if we didnt...

WWII

I have never heard any convincing evidence that Japan was about to throw in the towel, though many of the civilians might have, but the military showed no signs, and seemed ready to pull a stalen and throw every avaliable person into harms way. Add this to the horrific battles of island hopping and you have a problem. Estimates of 5 million men needed for the first wave of an invasion. Another thing to remember is that this was a country that was behaving as brutal to the people around them, if not more so, than the germans. IIRC death estimates on the US side alone ranged from 1-5 mill. I have never seen stats on the Japanese side of the coin. Either way that is disturbing. Disturbing, but not as disturbing as the idea of Hitler having his own, which was under developement.

Something even scarrier is that there are things in developement across the world that are far worse than run of the mill nukes...

here is just a slice article...

also i think, and this is coming out of the very hazzy section of grey matter toward the back of my brain, that there are non-nuclear bombs that exist that are stronger/more effective than the bombs dropped during WWII.

Ok thats enough random incoherent babbling for me tonight...

Edit: Well maybe a little more babbling...

Shim: I think you are drastically over simplifing things there. If the US, went to war with China, it would be horrific on all side. Also who is to say that in the near future that other countries will not rise to the might of the US, or that the US shall fall. To simply throw away your trump card cause you currently hold the baddest hand doesnt make sense. Thing often change...
Post
#72569
Topic
Are we wasting our lives?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72569/action/topic#72569
Time
Hmm i dont know, if i was you bossk i would try to capture an oveview of philosophical history first by reading through a text like the one i mentioned above. A lot of philosophy is somewhat reactionary based, so it helps to understand what the author your reading is reacting to, whether that be culutural, another writer, historic events, etc. Also a basic text will introduce you to the basic terminology of philosopy, as well as a synopsis of the thinkers past, providing a context to work from. Once you have the basic grasp on the big picture you can start to focus more on the thinkers that interest you, diving into there works and beginning to interpret them yourself.

oh and you dont have to pay full price for that book, check with your local used books stores, or on ebay. My original copy of the book got stolen, but i got it off ebay for $6 shipping and all.


EDIT: I would also recommend taking some time to read more than just western philosophy. The Tao te Ching, Art of War, Book of the 5 Rings, just to name a few are all great reads.

Also if you are interested in religious text at all check out this site. www.sacred-text.com. It is by far the largest religious text archive i have ever run across on the net. Best of all its free...

enjoy
Post
#72336
Topic
Episode Three Spoiler or No Spoilers?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72336/action/topic#72336
Time
Over the last two movies i have managed to stay 96%, yes that is an exact number , spoiler free. I do so in order to perserve the freshness of the movies, knowing that the first time i sit in the theatre it will be the first time a vast majority of the info will hit me. I to this day havent regretted any of it. How bout you, you spoiler free or are you on TF.N every day waiting for spy reports? and why do you pursue either?

Post
#72263
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72263/action/topic#72263
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Regicidal_Maniac
Kingsama you are definitely well versed in the historical origins of your beliefs, which is something I respect a great deal. Knowledge and intelligence don't oten go hand in hand with faith, you may well take exception to that but you must also realise that most people are, to put it kindly, not very smart.


Unfortunately i have to agree with you here. A good 90% of the people that clame my faith, or any other faith for that matter, have very little knowledge of the faith and its inner workings. Their limited knowledge is based on Cultural Churchdom/Christendom and not the pillars of the faith. But on the flip side you have those that have become so intrentched in CHurchdom tradition that they loose all fresh perspective on the book they hold dear. But this parisght of thoughtlessness attaches itself to people outside of different faiths, people everywhere are sheep. I had the blessing of being raised outside the faith, and of having wonderful teachers that taught me to quesiton.

Quote

I HAVE studied my opposing views as I mentioned my upbringing already. My profile will tell you where I'm from but I don't see what being an Aussie has to do with this discussion.


I respect that you have studied other alternatives to your views, most people dont try there ideas against those who appose them. Oh and as for why i asked your homeland...Simple, if there is a person on the other side of the box, and not just a bunch of words, then it becomes less easy to be the bolegerent idiot i often times become.

Quote

I've mentioned before than I waver between Atheism (denial) and Agnoticism (apathy) depending on what I've been drinking and what mood I'm in. I am well aware that a distinction exists between the two and I almost never pay religion, the churches or God any consideration until they start to annoy me somehow. I have some spiritual belief based on what I've experienced but that too I have researched the origins of and found it to be similar to a near death or a K-holing/third-eye type experience.


You sound a lot like my best friend here...

Quote

I would like more people to understand what they believe and question why. To question if they believe that those things that are thoroughly untestable, not just unprovable but completely unfalsifiable because they cannot even be tested, things that have no impact on the world should be the genesis for laws that discriminate and promote ignorant hatred (jimbo) toward others for reasons unknown and nonexistent.


though i suppose i disagree with you on the amounts of evidence out there, and at this point would rather leave it at that.(It will save you and me both time and effort, i have had my fair share of lengthy internet debates where we take turns referenceing various authers ideas, books, blah blah balh, only to see that once the dust clears you still stand where you did and vice versa.) I agree with you on the need to be informed. I work with at risk youth, and they like many others, have die hard beliefs about a myriad of things. I constantly challenge them to why they belileve what they do, "Give me and example" "what is the evidence?", "why do you believe what you do?" i say constantly, always playing the devils advocate. I, in the end, just want people to think. Hopefully if you can do that it will prevent the hatred...

Quote

I'm not a hostile person at all I just get argumentative in discussions with people who don't think that morals can come from anywhere except the bible and that there is one true belief and that this true belief states that this kind of person is right and this kind of person is wrong and the wrong person will be punished in death so we are free to legislate against them in life. That kind of idiotic thinking is what disgusts me.


In the end the only purely logicical pov is agnostic pov. We really dont know, or cant prove ANYTHING. Descarte, I believe, was kinda coping out a bit with the i think there for i am bit. It was an out for someone struggling with the question of existence. Maybe i am wrong though. To completely dismiss another theory is crap. I may disagree with you but you know what it is still possible that you are right. To speak specifically on morals, for all i know they could be nothing more than a result of social evolution, i dont, but there is know way to prove either theory 100% right or wrong.

Quote

Religion is my pet peeve and as I said before I make sure I don't associate with many of their type (the bible wavers) in my life as they only end up pissing me off with their high and mighty attitudes and life's too short to share a drink with a tongue-clucker. I don't mind what anyone believes as long as they know why they believe it and why they shouldn't NOT believe it and as long as they keep it to themselves and out of government and legislature.


Hey not all of us bible wavers are bad people, i know many people that would be considered fundi's if you look at core theology, but are nothing like the cultural traditions that are readily assotiated with the term "fundi". By the by what in the world is a tongue clucker???

Quote

I think I got to this point in the thread because Bush is a dangerously stupid Theocrat who believes in things I'm sure he has never questioned. I don't doubt that he believes as I know from first hand experience what a powerful thing a drug-addled born again experience can be, but in my case I continued to question it until my sanity returned and Bush likely did not question the root causes of such a vision. It's a common enough occurence but there's nothing divine about it so far as my inquiries and research can ascertain. But then I'm still looking, is Bush? Or is he going to smite the heathens because his vision commands him to do so?


Obviously i support Bush and think he is a geniuine person, further more i dont think that he by and large lets his faith dictate policy. One of the places that a really disagree,though, with him is with homosexual marriage. I personally think that there should be no federally or state sponsered version of marriage, civil unions for all. If i want to married i can do so through my church, synagogue, temple, etc. If i am not religious i can go have my traditional serimony and be married. Let the sacred argue about it, and take the GOV out of it. But this issue isnt as important to me as many others so i still back him.


Post
#72097
Topic
Are we wasting our lives?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72097/action/topic#72097
Time
Any fan of SK is worth talking too. But you are right he is a bit of a heavy read, not something you thumb through on the toilet.

On topic:

Life has to be balanced, and if one doesnt have a balance, of in this case leisure and productiveness, one will wilt. Ever spent all night wrapped in philosophical thought, wrestling with the so called grand questions? Yeah when i do that after a time i feel like i need to come up for a breathe. That is where entertainment like SW comes in, or when my wife comes in and pulls me from my brooding mode. I turn into a awfly hard person to be around, when i dont breathe so to speak. Not to mention i regress back into my extreme introversion... Thank the Maker for some form of light heartedness...

Quote
Hey guys, I have been interested in philosophy for a while now but have no idea where to get started when it comes to reading it. I know this may be a bit off topic here, but what would be a good first book for someone with interest and no clue whatsoever?


Bossk: if you are interested in a starting off text, go find Looking At Philosophy: The Unbearable Heaviness of Philosophy Made Lighter by Donald Palmer. It is by no means the most unbiased book, but it does a very good job in summarizeing philosophy in laymens terms. It is a good place to start out...
Post
#72069
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72069/action/topic#72069
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: motti_soL
errr...
Quote
Isreals military power is more than enough to defend itself from the rest of the middle east. Do some research.


if all the arab/moslem countries of the world united (wishful thinking, i know), the they would crush Israel, they can defend, yes against two three even four countries, but if they all started to really deliver hard blows to Israel, it would simply cease to exist.

actually, NK would send nukes on Japan first, they said so themselves. and one nuke that gets through is enough... thats the problem.

Socialism

Communism



please read everything there is on that page and see the difference... very different!

Quote
Um there are elections being held in afganistan, and in the planning stage in Irag. In imperialism gov. done allow those things, you set up the Governing body.


and the government that is being set up by the Bush admin in Iraq is elected? errr... they are puppets being put into office because the USA knows that they will do its bidding... for some time.

Despotism tends to go well with dictatorship, maybe i just didnt make myself clear, sorry if that was the case...

Quote
Marxism is a athiestic/agnostic belief system and it has shed mucho blood.

People seem to attack religion only for being the medium at which the socially powerful manipulate the uninformed masses to violence, when in fact religion is only one of many different ideas that have been used to manipulate the masses into violence.


oh and religion hasnt shed much blood? errr... Christianity, Islam, Shinto, Aum to name just a few...



Point taken, if some how every muslim country in the world united the would crush them, but that wont happen.

Hmm i read only a short while ago, some diatribe from Kim Il about turning SK Seoul specifically into a burning lake of fire... or something along those lines, in connection to the use of his nuclear weapons...


I know socialism and communism are different, i understood your point to contend that they are not connected, which they obviously are...

Elections:

So the citizens of Afganistan and Iraq are all puppets of the Bush administration??? Cause that is what you are saying. Cause the US didnt place men into the positions, they are being voted on by the people. Man bush should when win this election in America as well, with all that mystical power...

and for blood shed... i was admiting that religious movements have shead lots of blood, the point that i was making in turn was that religious based manipulation of the people to blood shed doesnt have the market cornered. There are other systems of belief that have lead to equal manipulation ending in brutal events...

notice the wording of religion only... and relgion is only one of many...
Post
#72049
Topic
It's official...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72049/action/topic#72049
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Regicidal_Maniac
What a load of piffle.

But since you're curious.

The history of atheism and agnosticism is not the one soaked in blood my friend that history is maintained by the Church the blood was spilled in the name of faith and not rational inquiry.


Marxism is a athiestic/agnostic belief system and it has shed mucho blood.

People seem to attack religion only for being the medium at which the socially powerful manipulate the uninformed masses to violence, when in fact religion is only one of many different ideas that have been used to manipulate the masses into violence.

Quote

There's nothing dangerous about agnosticism it's not an extreme of anything, it's a lack of belief in things that have no proof. If God, why not the Toothfairy the same proof exists in each case. If God why not Aliens or Ghosts, or Goblins and Witches. Because it's all meaningless bullshit that has no basis in facts and no bearing on the world and life. I mean, if there isn't a toothfairy then who or what are you denying? I mean, if there aren't witches then who or what are you denying?



ag·nos·tic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (g-nstk)
n.

One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

taken from dictionary.com, agnostics dont deny the existance of G-d, only are skeptical or simply say "i dont know". The lack of a belief in G-d is Atheism. (A) meaning no/anti/ , and (theism) belief in G-d, (ruffly speaking of course)


Quote

Choosing not to believe in something for which there exists no evidence whatsoever is not a choice at all it's the only option. The surprising thing is that people will believe any guff you feed them if it comes from a book that is covered with enough dust. It's surprising that given the massive weight of evidence against religion and the zero proof for that there still exists any free-thinking fully-functioning humans who can swallow such lies, sophistry and illusion.


Firstly i find it intersting that you automatically assume that us "theist" are all uneducated, moronic, mind slobs. When in fact i know, and am, many people that have studied the opposing views. Have you done the same? Have you read any of the numerous writing past or present that bring up examples of evidence? or do you disregard them based upon pre-suppositions?

Quote
The Herculean myth resembles Jesus in many areas. Hercules was born as a human from the union of God (Zeus) and the mortal and chaste Alcmene, his mother. Similar to Herod who wanted to kill Jesus, Hera wanted to kill Hercules. Like Jesus, Hercules traveled the Earth as a mortal helping mankind and performing miraculous deeds. Like Jesus who wnt to Hell and then died and rose to heaven, Hercules went to Hades/The Underworld then died, rose to Mount Olympus and became a god. Hercules gives example of perhaps the most popular hero in Ancient Greece and Rome. They believed that he actually lived, told stories about him, worshiped him, and dedicated temples to him. People dismiss Hercules and other Greek gods as myth and legend because people no longer believe in the Greek and Roman fable stories. When a civilisation dies, so to do their gods. Christianity and its church authorities, on the other hand, still hold a powerful influence (vice grip) on governments, institutions, and colleges.

Many of the legends of Hercules from 1500BCE were fables that had been passed down from generations until they were written in more polished form about 500-400 BCE. Some six centuries later these stories show up again, but ascribed to a newcomer, Jesus of Nazareth. Known as the Great Teacher, the Christians began to call him first the Messiah, and then later the Son of God, clearly trying to capitalize on the love the people had for Hercules, the original Son of God.


um the OT refers to the Messiah and the Son of G-d, which predates Greek myth. Heck, the Profit Isiah refers to the Comming Messiah as Immanuel, aka G-d with us, an idea that is evident in the OT far before Isiah Also that aside, there are many other tails that precede the Hercule of G-d having offspring.

Just some inaccuracies...
There was no "union" of G-d the father and Mary.
Jesus didnt go to Hell, he died on earth and then rose again.
But you are right there are various simulaties between the Story of Christ and a landry list of other religious characters/figures. But that in and of itself does not disprove or prove anything. You also seem to be forgeting Zorastrianism and the primary effects that it allegidly would have had on Christianity. You should read up on that, it is a much better idea than this greek stuff, same ancient roots and such...

Quote
If you bothered to read a different book you would discover that yes Jesus lived, but his name was Yoshua and yes he was a good public speaker but an ordinary man who was mythologised by a violent cult.


Again not all christians/ or other theists for that matter are drooling morons... I am well aware of Jesus' real name...

The christian church was pasifistic for its first three centuries. (until it was adopted by constatine as the official religion of the Roman empire. This is also where many other non christian traditions and beliefs creep in but that is another story for another thread.) You also seem to be attributing a long generating and developmental period to Christianity, where as this period in Christianity (a jewish cult) was very short, and you have its leaders (the apostles) some of which that are steeped in Jewish religious thought and spiritual docterine, voliteering to die for the cause. Now i agree that people dieing for a cause doesnt prove that the cause is right, or true, but it does proove that they believe in its authenticity of the idea. If i am understanding you correctly you are stating that the Christian church founders understood the connection and still went out and died.

Also i would like to bring up that the Jews were/are an extremely tight nit culture, and the probability of greek/roman mythology effecting there belief system is highly unlikely.

Oh by the by Goodwins law was invoked pages before i brought up hitler. I think Jimbo brought it up circa page 3 or 4...****


In a switching of gears, RM where are you from? I am sure that you arent as hostile as you come across in your posts. I am known to get ampoed up during discussions, especially internet ones where there are only words and no faces...




On a completely different note: Motti

Quote
several things, since i waasnt here since yesterday morning.

the israel situation: the US is holding a hand over Israel because if they didnt, there wouldnt be any Israel anymore. there is a saying in the Middle East: if all moslem/arab countries spat at once towards Israel, Israel would drown...


Isreals military power is more than enough to defend itself from the rest of the middle east. Do some research.

Quote

the problem is that the Bush Admin does not want to learn from past mistakes. what is going on at this moment is called Imperialism. it was done before in the 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th century and nobody wants to return to that and nobody thought it was the best thing.


Um there are elections being held in afganistan, and in the planning stage in Irag. In imperialism gov. done allow those things, you set up the Governing