logo Sign In

ricarleite

User Group
Members
Join date
9-Apr-2004
Last activity
21-Aug-2020
Posts
6,592

Post History

Post
#105522
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105522/action/topic#105522
Time
I know that printing more money generates inflantion: during the war the nazis were secretly bringing counterfeit money into England in order to create such scenario. But the Federal Reserve is allowed to actually print money? There's a word for it, I don't know what is the word in english, you gotta have some uh, lemme call "credit", in order to print money. You can't just go on and print it...
Post
#105493
Topic
ROTS: Gut Feeling
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105493/action/topic#105493
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Only people who've seen Doctor Strangelove will get this reference: But for some reason I can picture GL riding a big ol' bomb labeled Revenge of the Sith out the bottom of a WWII era bomber (CGI, of course), whipping it with his cowboy hat, going "Eeeeee haaawww! Eeeeee haaaaawww!!" as he falls to oblivion on an unsuspecting fan base.


LOL!!! ROTFL!!!

Dr. Strangelucas, or: how did I learn to stop worring and love the prequels
Post
#105492
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105492/action/topic#105492
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage

That is wierd.

Think about the companies of the world, or for that matter, the companies in the US. By their very nature they compete with eachother. What do they have to gain by fighting wars? Central banking has been at the heart of conflict since the beginning of time. The big European banks being some of the biggest culprits. The Rothschilds, the Warburgs. The Morgans and Rockerfellers in the US. It's an old story. I've done a lot of research on Napoleon. One of the reasons he was constantly fighting in Europe was because he had France almost totally debt free, which means the European banks lost one of their biggest customers. What's the answer? Squeeze the credit of his neighbors and force them to get involved.

There's a lot of thought that the US got involved in WWI because massive loans from central banks to England and France were in danger of default, so the Luisitania incident "occured".


I have always thought that in north america, as opposed to europe, banking institutions didn't gather so much power, mostly because of the economical stability of the dollar (although it has lost some value recently), and because banking institutions in the US are de-centralized. Also, because of financial issued far too complicated for me to talk about, north american banks are not reference for investments such as Cayman Islands or Switzerland...

I can think of thousands of north american companies, I can think of some who would profit from governmental decisions (Lockheed, Halliburton...), but I can't think of a north american bank with that same power...

BTW, what is the major bank in america?
Post
#105484
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105484/action/topic#105484
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
I think the companies do have influence. However, I believe the central banks have even more power. A good book on the subject of why wars happen, why the world is as terrible as it is, what we can look forward to in the future is "The Creature from Jekyl Island", which discusses the nature of the power central banks have. Yes, the companies have enormous amounts of money, but the central banks are the ones that hold it, or lend it, and collect interest on it, etc; There's a quote in the book, I forgot who said it and I know I'm paraphrasing, but it was something like "Allow me to control the issuance of a nation's currency and I care not who is in control". Very interesting, very scary stuff.


I've read some on the subject, but I think most of what is attributed to baking institutions is mere speculation, almost a conspiracy theory... I've seen theories about banks profiting from selling organs (I mean HUMAN organs, not the musical instrument), too bizarre.
Post
#105441
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105441/action/topic#105441
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Quote
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
I would sugest that the U.S government only intervene in foreign affairs if it is of some interest to them, be it security, financial, etc. It may not be an obvious interest, but they will have some interest, even if it's citizen's are unaware.


I agree, however it just never seems to work out that way. We could never make the case to invade anywhere there's a drop of oil, because everyone would scream about it. It is unfortunate, because I do believe the US can be a force for good, especially it's military. However, we're often in lose-lose situations because of the games our politicians play, and in the court of public opinion.


There's corporate interest as well, and that goes beyond the whole politics. The thing is, I belive it is wrong to intervere merely for financial interests. And if we consider how much money the belic industry makes for each war or military intervention, we must ask ourselves if these multi-billion dollar companies influence the political decision behind the killings and bombings... I must say, one should be very naivee if he thinks those companies don't influence the war industry at all.
Post
#105420
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105420/action/topic#105420
Time
The US fought in the WW2 on the right side, along with Canada, Australia, England, South America, and the Russian Red Army, who had the biggest losses in war and reached Berlin first, freeing Poland on the way. Despite of that, some people still think that WW2 justifies pretty much every military action.

Since socialism isn't the cause for interventions, I asume the only real need for an intervention is when the people is taken by a dictator that imposes suffering on its people. Take Hitler for an example, the nazi party was absolutely not socialist. And yet... why sometimes actions are taken to make sure the dictators are getting stronger? The Iran-Iraq war as an example, the south americans miliraty dictatorship as another example... Take Idi Amin Dada for an example, the dictator of Uganda during the 1970s. He killed and brutalized his people, he had strong relations with the soviets, he freaking ATE his enemies... and yet, absolutely no country at all moved one finger to take him out. You know who took Idi Amin Dada from power? Tanzania. When Uganda invaded Tanzania, the army from that country not only fought back, but actually invaded Uganda and disposed Idi Amin...

And in some cases, like in south america, the socialist parties were not even controlling the nations, there were absolutely no communist seizes of power, there was only democracy and freedom,and yet brutal military dictatorships were installed...
Post
#105345
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105345/action/topic#105345
Time
OK so, since we mentioned the whole issue of socialism in central america, let me ask you guys something. If a country had estabilished a communist regime and yet, with no dictatorship, with the power concentrated on people's hands, and no problems to the people, would it be OK for any foreign troops to invade it and force a capitalist regime? I'm not saying it happened! I'm just asking that so I can understand your point of view of what's justifiable for an intervention.
Post
#105286
Topic
The Things We Hate And Love Thread .
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105286/action/topic#105286
Time
Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
I hate when you go to use the bathroom (in this case the one at work) and some dirty fucker has stunk the place out. I almost just puked because of the smell. What are these people eating???


I hate that too, I hate public bathrooms. I hate being in the bathroom and someone else coming in, I hate when there's a foul smell, I hate when I realize the last man that used the toilet aparently couldn't "aim" very well, and decided that someone else should clean his own mess. Thanks God that where I work now, the bathrooms are clean and OK. When I was working on Rio, people used to go to the bathrooms to smoke, I almost couldn't breathe in there..!
Post
#105325
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105325/action/topic#105325
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Gorbachev? What did he do besides surrender? He was the leader of a totalitarian system that needed to be destroyed. Reagan (and Maggie and JPII) left him no options. And the only reason Reagan's administration did what they did with Iran-Contra is because the Democratically controlled congress refused to fund anti-communists in the Western hemisphere, in other words: Gave tacit aid to the Soviet flunkies in Central and South America. Or maybe the popular leftist views that Truman won the Cold War by losing China and Eastern Europe to the communists is right. Or that they really did have 75 years of bad weather and that's why communism didn't work.

Nixon: All he did was get us out of Vietnam (which JFK got us into, BTW) by bombing Cambodia then going directly to the Chinese. And, refresh my memory...who had the world on the bring of nuclear holocaust, JFK or Nixon? *cough* Missles of October *cough*

Mandella? Don't get me started.


OK before this goes on, let me remind everyone here, including yourself, that this is a political view discussion, and based on opinions. Opinions are like clocks, they can be a little bit foward or back, but no clock is entirely correct. Also, to discuss is not the same as to offend, and we are NOT letting this get personal. OK? I'm not competing with you, I'm not against you, we are just discussing points of view. No one is "right", there is no right answer. OK?

Reagan did have some part on it ("mr gorbatchov, tear down this wall"), but he was also not very sensitive on the subject, joking about the missles who were coming from ussr at that moment... Try to imagine how Regan and Maggie would act if Kruchev was on office... But I'll give you Reagan for an influencial man in the 20th, ok. He was influencial after all.

Iran-Contras: ok so let me get this straight, it is OK for a country to sell weapons to both Iraq AND Iran, so one can kill each other, and then get the profit from this and invest on killing civilians on suth american countries who had strong communist parties? Let me remind you, I'm from Brazil, who had a violent dictatorship for 20 years backed up by the CIA, the US secret service, and with actions authorized by Lyndonn Jonshon and Nixon. I've talked about it enough on another topic, but if you want me to go on I will.

Nixon: he got you out of Vietnan? OK correct me if I'm wrong - I'm not being sarcastic, I don't know, correct me! - but didn't the US withdraw from Vietnan in 1975, when Ford was on office? Now, imagine if the US had never invaded Vietnan, the north would win the same way as it did, right? And how is Vietnan today? Eh? There's a freaking McDonalds on Ho Shi Ming City (Saigon).

JFK: The missle crisis would have a very different ending if Kennedy was not on office. A mushroom cluded ending. But I don't know, maybe what've read on the subject and on the actions taken by the White House back then were wrong...

Mandella: What's wrong with him? OK you don't like him, let's have MLKJr and Steve Biko only...
Post
#105313
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105313/action/topic#105313
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: Kingsama
Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
I'm not going to pick 5, I'll pick 10.

PLEASE do keep in mind that I'm listing the most INFLUENTIAL persons of the last century, and by influential I mean people whose actions changed our world. OK? I'm not a nazi.

1- Hitler
2- Ghandi
3- Lenin
4- JFK
5- Churchill
6- Gorbatchov
7- Einstein
8- Jonh Paul II
9- Stalin
10- Mandela

And why not mention GL too? I mean, can you imagine the world today without Star Wars?
Not to say he wasn't a good president, but why pick JFK over someone like FDR or Reagan??



JFK was a Joke... How do you have Gorby and not Reagan? Why Mandela over MLK Jr? And Church Hill over FDR? (there would not have been an england save for FDR and Hitlers over zealousness.)



* sigh* OK, let's do it.

JFK: if Nixon had won over JFK, the world would be a nuclear radioactive wasteland today.

Gorbachov: If there was only Reagan and no Gorbatchov, the Iron Curtain would still be there. I guarantee you. OK maybe we CAN consider Reagan if you find that the Iran-Contras was a major happening in worlds history. Or that his films changed the world.

Churchill: OK I'll give you Roosevelt.

Mandela: You're right, I give you MLKjr and Steve Bilko with Mandela. And Rose Parks (is that her name)?
Post
#105309
Topic
Depressing but fairly intellligent blog...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105309/action/topic#105309
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Quote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Quote
"And now in our quest to bring you stories in gory detail..." and then shot herself in the head on live tv. If she had done it in her bedroom, nobody would have cared, but because she did it on tv it was huge. My wife and I are becoming more concerned about this and are making an effort to drastically reduce the time that the kids spend watching it. Very frightening.


Oh my flipping gosh... That's terrible. It almost sounds like a very bad joke from SCARY MOVIE.... That actually happened...

What nation/channel did it occur on?


He did not specify, but it was in the mid-west in the 70's at some point.



Some people will do anything for a scoop. When a technical problem interfered with the orderly presentation of a story on her morning news show, this 30-year-old news anchor announced, "In keeping with Channel 40's policy of bringing you the latest in blood and guts and in living color, you are going to see another first attempted suicide." She then drew a revolver and shot herself in the head. Chubbuck expired 14 hours later in hospital.
Post
#105289
Topic
Most Influential Person
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/105289/action/topic#105289
Time
I'm not going to pick 5, I'll pick 10.

PLEASE do keep in mind that I'm listing the most INFLUENTIAL persons of the last century, and by influential I mean people whose actions changed our world. OK? I'm not a nazi.

1- Hitler
2- Ghandi
3- Lenin
4- JFK
5- Churchill
6- Gorbatchov
7- Einstein
8- Jonh Paul II
9- Stalin
10- Mandela

And why not mention GL too? I mean, can you imagine the world today without Star Wars?