Lethe

User Group: Members
Join date: 22-Aug-2004
Last activity: 30-Nov-2004
Posts: 290

Post History

Post: #73061
Topic: Forget the plot, we want action!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73061/action/topic#73061
Time: 22-Oct-2004 2:16 PM

I think my favorite action sequence would have to be the Hoth battle. I really love snow-speeders for some reason, and thought the AT-ATs, and AT-STs were very neat. I think this is why I bought Shadows of the Empire for Nintendo 64 and Rogue Squadron for Gamecube, because I got to be a pilot in that battle.

Post: #73060
Topic: My Generation Rocks!!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73060/action/topic#73060
Time: 22-Oct-2004 2:08 PM

Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
You do make an excellent point Ric. A lot of people "blindly" support one side or the other without knowing all the facts.

I try to hear all the facts, I really do. I just feel that Bush's methods of doing things will have a better long-term outcome than what Kerry wants to do.

I see Bush trying to put more power in the hands of the people when it concerns our own lives.
(ex. Bush tax cuts let us spend more of our own money, Bush medical savings accounts helps supplement insurance costs)

I see Kerry trying to use the government to take control over our lives.
(ex. Kerry wants to have this massive governmental medical insurance program. He'll need money to pay for it, so he raises taxes. We have less control over what our money is used for, and less control over how we get medical help.)

I dont want to turn this into a squabble. I just want to put some thoughts out here.
First, the government runs on tax money. I dont want to give up my money any more than you, but I do understand that if I want the government to function it needs funding.
Also in the realm of taxation is this major difference. Kerry is in support of stricter taxation on large corporations. He proposes eliminating loopholes for US companies established outside the US territory (this would be major discouragement for outsourcing). As far as I can tell (pure opinion) Bush is far more concerned with taking care of his base.

Second, I think that Kerry's medical insurance plan is far less intrusive in daily life then Bush's proposed Constitutional amendment. I mean, if a person's significant other cannot pass them property, money, etc. nor visit them in the hospital with the freedom of a spouse, nor approve medical procedures with the freedom of a spouse, and so on and so fourth. Im not even saying you have to be "for" or "against" gay marriage. Im just saying that people deserve rights, and nobody in America should be denied rights because of a non-intrusive choice in their lifestyle.
I guess I just fail to understand how Kerry's government would control people's lives. As far as he has tried to present it, people will be able to make choices for themselves...the same cant be said for all of Bush's stances.

Im really not trying to debate, and these are not personal attacks. Merely, im offering another perspective.

We should all welcome differences of opinions. What is the worth of a conviction that has never been challenged?

Post: #73059
Topic: BaseBall talk
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73059/action/topic#73059
Time: 22-Oct-2004 2:01 PM

I cant figure it out Warbler?! I too think the Yankees are poo. Haha...sorry. But seriously, when it comes down to who can spend the most money on the most all-stars, its just not fun anymore. Honestly, I think thats what I like about the Cardinals right now, they have some big names, but they are winning games because they are a fundamentally sound team.

*AHEM* I still think the Sox are going to win.

Post: #73058
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73058/action/topic#73058
Time: 22-Oct-2004 1:55 PM

Ill admit that I dont have as much knowledge about the situation in Iraq circa '01-'02, so if im downplaying the inhumanity I apologize. I certainly dont intend to make light of any sufferiing. I suppose that my exposure to the situation in Sudan makes it seem more impactful.
Like I said, I dont have much knowledge of the previously mentioned situation in Iraq, so I have to maybe take back some of the definitive nature in my statements. This has definitely spurred me to do more research and broaden the scope of my understanding, and I thank you for that, as well as for your replies throughout this thread.

As far as the latter part of your post is concerned, I couldnt agree with you more. Neither candidate has mentioned Sudan on their own, the only thing ive heard were responses in the first debate...its almost as if the situation has evaporated since then. Or perhaps the candidates both realize that the majority of Americans are of the "me-me-me" mindset - and if either candidate stressed that situation, or any other foreign situation we are not currently well invested in, it might be seen as a lack of proper priority, or useless liberalism. Too an extent this is the most logical tendancy American voters posess. Distinct concern with issues DIRECTLY related to life in America...I suppose that its the most important aspect of an administration - foreign policy takes a back seat right now, simply because its just not as pertinent.

EDIT - This obviously excludes Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea. Aside from those three, I cant really think of any other foreign policy issues getting attention this campaign, from either candidate. (Well shit, right as I typed that I thought of Canada, but you get the picture. These are all issues that directly concern America...while the situation in Sudan will most likely be an afterthought).

Post: #73054
Topic: My Generation Rocks!!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73054/action/topic#73054
Time: 22-Oct-2004 1:44 PM

Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite

Of course, I don't mean ANYONE here. People here (except someone who has been banned recently) are political active and know what their saying. And if I offended anyone, well, I meant to offend republicans AND democrats equally.

lol. I appreciate your post ric. I definitely agree with you. I honestly think that the majority of voters in America are relatively uninformed. Im shocked sometimes at the number of people who vote down party lines without regard to actual policy or representation.

EDIT - A note to Bossk: I started a thread on Nuclear Proliferation that has stayed amazingly civil. I think that things have toned down a bit. I, for one, would appreciate any participation in that discussion, as well as any others that it spawns. If its not your cup of tea thats alright - just thought id put that out there for your consideration.
-Lethe

Post: #73023
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73023/action/topic#73023
Time: 22-Oct-2004 8:21 AM

Quote
it may be that compassionate conservativism is simply the synthesis of social conservatism and fiscal liberalism.

This is from that sites definition of "Compassionate Conservative" SERIOUSLY, THIS CANNOT GET OUT. If the public saw George W. in the same paragaph as liberal it might be the end of his campaign.

EDIT - Thanks for the links Kingsama, its great to have a historical reference, as well as a clear view of just how much people take for granted when using distinctions like "liberal" and "conservative."

Post: #73022
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73022/action/topic#73022
Time: 22-Oct-2004 8:17 AM

Kingsama, this last post clears things up for me. Sorry if I seemed defensive earlier. I can agree that older weapons need to be dismantled - there are really a lot of benefits to this. If that means that at the same time, we upkeep our new weapons and make them more efficient (THE ONES CURRENTLY IN EXISTENCE) then thats fine. Like I said, complete disarmament is a blind ideal. Ill take getting rid of old, outdated Nuclear weapons as a step in the right direction

Post: #73021
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73021/action/topic#73021
Time: 22-Oct-2004 8:15 AM

Im none too familiar with the Clinton failure in Somalia (unless for some reason I am not identifying this correctly - the only genocide situation I remember Clinton dealing with was in Bosnia/Herzegovina), perhaps Im showing my age. However, I dont think you can compare a genocide thats resulted in the death of nearly 100k people and the displacement of nearly a million to the situation in Iraq circa 2001-02. Im not trying to downplay the crimes against humanity that were taking place in Iraq, im just saying that the scale is really completely different.
I wager that we wouldnt lead a coalition into Sudan because we dont have much vested interest in Sudan. Im not going off on a "liberal" tangent and saying that the war in Iraq was for oil, I dont want this thread to deteriorate. Im just saying plainly, we dont stand to gain anything from Sudan by placing a democratic government there. Thats not my opinion, im just relating the facts as I understand them. Im certain we will continue to support the AU and send money to help get the situation taken care of, just dont expect anything more active than that.
Case in point, Chechnya. There has been an on going genocidal movement, but we dont stand to gain much there. (Ill concede that another reason we arent participating is the residual situation with Russia - I doubt they want us marching an army into their country to dispell/settle a situation - especially considering we are one of the main proponents of their current government. It might be seen as a slap in the face.)

Post: #72971
Topic: StarWarsLegacy.com - The Official Thread
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72971/action/topic#72971
Time: 22-Oct-2004 2:13 AM

Just checked out the sight. I must say you are doing phenomenal work. The effort you are putting into that project is a testament to how much of a fan you are. And the respect you are giving Lucas, Fox, etc. is a testament to your ethical responsibility. I guess im just glad to see some people maintain that.
Uh...right on. Keep up the great work.

Post: #72959
Topic: The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72959/action/topic#72959
Time: 22-Oct-2004 1:22 AM

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Wow. That is truly disgusting.

That is the kind of thing PeTA should go after, rather than attack legitmate businesses and brainwash kids into thinking they're mother's are horrible people.

Unless, of course, their mothers are.

I laughed so hard at the last part of your reply. I can seriously remember asking my mom what her deal was with serving veal once...I mean, she hadnt done it since I was like 4-5, but when I found out what veal was I went home and demanded an explanation. Its just a funny thing I guess. Im an omnivore - yet and still, I dont condone certain practices. (Veal, Foie Gras, etc)

Post: #72945
Topic: The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72945/action/topic#72945
Time: 21-Oct-2004 11:23 PM

I dont take full stock in PETAs facts, but in their outreach video they say that the bolt thing is fine and dandy - but there are some issues. Each cow gets 1 hit with the bolt gun, if it doesnt kill the animal by chance, it goes right on through the process without further attempts to humanely kill it. I saw video of cows being boiled alive...chopped into while still alive....very very uncool.
Im not a vegetarian, I dont blindly support PETA. But slaughterhouse practices definitely need to be reformed. Current FDA ruling allows cows to be butchered that are dragged from the truck when they arrive. Also, Cows with cancerous growths or other abnormalities are able to be labled GRADE A as long as the infected/suspect region isnt included.
There are lots of curious short-cuts and loopholes...as with many things, but some things should be under tighter watch. I mean, c'mon we are eating this stuff...we should be pretty concerned with quality.

Post: #72962
Topic: Your hottie?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72962/action/topic#72962
Time: 21-Oct-2004 7:26 PM

I can think of a number of actresses (current and past) that I would like to see in that dress. And I suppose now, with this visual evidence, I must concede that Leia circa ANH is very appealing. Im sure that I thought so even more when I was younger and initially getting into SW.

BTW, I concur on Eliza being a superior specimen

Post: #72960
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72960/action/topic#72960
Time: 21-Oct-2004 7:23 PM

Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
Well, I sure hope Ric is wrong about WWIII. I hope we have enough sense to avoid such a horror as that would be.

I agree completely. But I honestly believe it would be, unquestionably, the end of the world as we know it. For some reason I cant type/speak that sentence without feeling cliche. Thanks REM!

Post: #72942
Topic: My Generation Rocks!!
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72942/action/topic#72942
Time: 21-Oct-2004 5:16 PM

Quote
It's always the political activists who stirr the trouble - usually young, angry and naive.

I dont consider myself an activist. I mean, I suppose some of my views would be similar to theirs. And I dont generally consider myself naive or angry. I cant control my age...
Im not arguing you directly, I dont think you were being entirely serious.

I think some polls are underestimating the number of first time voters. As we all know polls are not entirely comprehensive. Im not saying who is going to win...I think that regardless of who wins, about half the voters are going to be shocked. People on both sides of the coin are really convinced their candidate will win. Its peculiar to me that both sides feel like "how the hell can anyone support that guy?" Peculiar like most of life.

EDIT - I dunno why thats in italics, something weird happened when I was quoting.

Post: #72939
Topic: the lonne
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72939/action/topic#72939
Time: 21-Oct-2004 5:10 PM

Im really unfamiliar with Canada, and as such its currency. This thread is very amusing though...loonie. Heh.

Post: #72938
Topic: Your hottie?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72938/action/topic#72938
Time: 21-Oct-2004 5:07 PM

I wish I saw a million girls a day that looked as hot as Natalie Portman
I think she is really cute...but she hasnt taken the step towards hot for me. Especially not with all that needless make-up and crazy hair. *Not a fan of Leia with the buns over her ears, lol*

Now Aunt Beru....hot damn...

Post: #72936
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72936/action/topic#72936
Time: 21-Oct-2004 5:02 PM

Excellent quote Ric. I agree that there wont be anyone left. I dont think Einstein had quite envisioned the Weapons we have now when he was splitting(im sure he was into fusion too) atoms back in the '40s.
I used to say "Nu-q-lar" (thanks for the phonetics RRS) until sometime in 6th or 7th grade a teacher told me I was mispronouncing the word. Honestly, I dont expect somebody who said "strategery", "symbollogy", and "embetterment" to pick up on this new-fangled correct way to say Nuclear.
I agree with Regicidal that the Presidency indeed comes down to money. As far as it being for sale...I think thats a sticky argument to take up. I agree that media is one of the biggest elements of our elections, and that controlling media comes down to money. Let me just say though, I dont think that liberal media exists in America the way that some people think it does. I havent seen one headline about Sudan in the last month, and im here to say that a true liberal media outlet would find importance in that - as well as make it an issue in this election (to the best of their ability). Id have to say that ive found the most liberal media to be Public Radio. Generally Public Radio in America is the media outlet most internationally involved.

Ok, I have to stop. Some of that may not seem coherrant sorry. I like the stuff thats come out of this thread. Its been a long day, and there is a lot going on in my house right now...so ill be back tomorrow to try and clarify and keep the discussion up if there is any desire for it.

One final note however, I fundamentally disagree with you Kingsama - I dont see the logic in continually upgrading our Nuclear Weapons. Other weapons and systems yes, its logical. However, our current Nuclear Weapons are so incredibly powerful that I cant possibly understand why they need to be stronger...thats just me though man. I dont have a problem with you or anything, though im sure you wouldnt take it that way - im just saying, we disagree on that one aspect.
If it were up to me, we would get the majority of nations to disarm to the point that we have enough weapons to destroy the earth once...cause really...after that...whats the point? Ill acknowledge that we need some Nuclear Weapons to keep the MAD climate working...but even thats really tough for me.

Post: #72818
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72818/action/topic#72818
Time: 21-Oct-2004 6:52 AM

Regicidal, I certainly understand the political motivations. I was putting that question in the context of the conversation I had yesterday at school. I wonder how it is voters willingly support this sort of program?

I dont think there is any other way to see it though, you're right. I dont even think this one can be misconstrued as necessary for national security. (I wont cite the numerous reasons for this, sprinkled throughout this thread).

Post: #72814
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72814/action/topic#72814
Time: 21-Oct-2004 6:50 AM

"I think," he said, "we need to get off this planet, because I'm afraid we're going to destroy it."

Thats from the Scientist doing the majority of the anti-matter research for the Air Force. Id say I share his sentiment.

Post: #72812
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72812/action/topic#72812
Time: 21-Oct-2004 6:44 AM

I dont want to stifle some of the arguments here, but my original problem was Bush supporting the development of NEW Nuclear Weapons. Its been noted before that the current global stockpile could destroy the earth 10 times. IMO, thats certainly enough to maintain MAD. Money spent on new Nuclear Weapons now could be much more effectively spent elsewhere...if you want to keep it in context of defense, then how about our stumbling missle defense program.

Like I said, full disarmament is an ideal (a blind one currently). The important question is why we need NEW/MORE Nuclear Weapons?

Post: #72642
Topic: DVD+R compatable players
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72642/action/topic#72642
Time: 20-Oct-2004 8:43 PM

My PS2 is modded, but I dont think that has anything to do with it playing +Rs...I could be wrong, ill have to take my discs over to my friend's house and see.

Post: #72623
Topic: DVD+R compatable players
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72623/action/topic#72623
Time: 20-Oct-2004 7:22 PM

If Rikter is dealing +Rs then thats what I have, and they have played on all of my devices (PS2, an older Philips, and my newer Philips).

Post: #72644
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72644/action/topic#72644
Time: 20-Oct-2004 2:52 PM

Quote
Originally posted by: Warbler
forgive me for being stupid but what does "MAD" stand for?

The ironic thing of about Nuclear Weapons is that by somtimes they prevent wars. Think about it, why is it that the cold war btw the USSR and the USA never became a full blown hot war? Because each side knew that if they went to war it, it would only end it one way by both sides firing their nukes and destroying both nations. There was no way a either side could win a war against the other and to go war with the other was to commit suicide. If the nukes weren't there, each side might have been more temped to go to war because there would have a chance of victory. I am not saying that that justifies the existence of these terrible devices but it is ironic.

Hehe, essentially you did all but spell out the acronym. Mutual Assured Destruction.

The only point on which I disagree is this: even if a rogue nation has a nuclear weapon, we are by no means weakening our defense by getting rid of our Nuclear Weapons and those of other willing nations. The clear question is this - if September 11th had been a nuclear strike by a terrorist organization (essentially only changing one element) would a Nuclear counter attack have been called for by the US? If so, on what nation? Do you see what im saying? Modern day Nukes are WAY stronger than the WWII era's Big Boy and Little Jon. There is no strategic use for Nuclear weapons now, aside from the afformentioned MAD war avoidance.

EDIT - With regard to my hypothetical situation about September 11th; I acknowledge that if it were a nuclear attack the situation would be completely different. It is sooooo far beyond reasoning what would have been done. I mean honestly, if it had been a modern Nuclear weapon detonated...the destruction would have been instantly in the hundreds of thousands (upwards of half a million I would venture) the climate of the ENTIRE world would change. I imagine even the French would concede that our retaliation would be necessary. Sorry, no offense intended there. But the question still exists of whether or not its intelligent, or even prudent, to retaliate with a nuclear weapon. Im not sure the effect of two modern nuclear weapons on the environment, but im pretty sure green-house gas would take a back seat.

Post: #72622
Topic: Discussion: Your most prized star wars collectible
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72622/action/topic#72622
Time: 20-Oct-2004 1:16 PM

I dont really have anything that stands out as especially collectible. But id have to say my favorite items are my micro-machines. I can pretty much stage the Death Star II Space battle. (Loads of doubles ).
I especially like the 17 A-Wings I have, some from the battle damaged set, but most were just standard that I bought a bunch of. I never really cared for B-Wings, though I have a few. And my second favorite from the collection would be my Mon Calamari cruiser.

Post: #72620
Topic: Bush and Nuclear Proliferation
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/72620/action/topic#72620
Time: 20-Oct-2004 1:01 PM

Im glad to see that we can reach agreement on this issue. Or it seems that way, I hate to speak for people.

The event really was a blow to my faith in my generation, as well as humanity in general.

At this point I think that a total disarmament is far off. Im not being a blind idealist. Some nations have Nukes, thats a fact. Other nations want in, or get in as a byproduct of developing nuclear power. I think the best course of action is anti-proliferation lead by the US and other key nations (most of which I would consider US allies, and willing to join the cause). If we are trying to instill in other nations that nuclear weapons are not necessary, we might try to lead by example (as others have said).
And my compliments for the references to MAD. A concept we discussed much in US History. I think that some persons have lost sight of that. I dont know of any conservatives directly supporting the development of NEW Nuclear Weapons. The poor sod on my campus today is just blissfully ignorant. He is too young, as im sure most of us here are, to have any recollection of Hiroshima or Nagasaki - but we have all been taught (on some level I hope) of that great atrocity. (ON that note, its peculiar that the US so vehemently opposes acts against humanity, and yet we are the only nation to ever use a nuclear weapon on another, *ahem* TWICE). Perhaps the concept of MAD is completely foreign to him, who knows.

I do know that our standard ICBMs, Polaris missles in the US (I dont know the European counterpart names) are roughly 100 times stronger than the TWO bombs dropped on Japan combined. Honestly, how could we possibly need something new...do we need something stronger? And who in their right mind would ever authorize the use of that...which I can almost assure you would lead to the end of the human race as we know it.

As most of you agree, this isnt meant to persuade. Im still venting. Ive spent the afternoon since creating this thread trying to understand how a person could think the way that guy does...no success.
Thanks for the feedback guys, feel free to continue the commentary or change the subject. I would love to have a civil thread about semi-political/global questions.