Angstspawn's page

200 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

I'm shocked that Liz locked a thread, that doing so she was making DAESH a religious or any other sort of group against who violence shouldn't be advocated.

"I can't be civil" it's that you say Ambrosia... What's not civil, that I tell these people gave a price for sale for a 1 year old child? That I don't accept someone locks this out?
You see you're more shocked by my words than by their acts. Most probably it's not your problem, even better... it's not here the place to speak about it, here is a sanctuary where screams shouldn't be heard.

You know, most Jewish inside camps were thinking people didn't know about their fate, didn't know how inhumanly they were treated, that if the world knew, the would not accept it, the world would not tolerate it.
They were wrong, given the world knew the world hadn't move much.

It's what angers me, locking that thread is just one more proof that we do not consider that people like us, part of what we are. We're sad to know what happened but their suffering is like another's specie disease, their ill-fate can't reach us. It belongs to them and can't apply to us. We don't have empathy for them, just contempt.

I envy you Ambrosia, in the world you're living in I'm what's most outraging and rude. You're living in the best of the world, you're "lucky".
I'm passionate, maybe even uneducated, and I was naive enough to believe that anywhere you'll find yourself in The Land of The Free, there'll be a place -even a virtual one- to try to find how to make this world better.

Maybe I blame Liz for showing me how naive I am...

Jeff, it happens we disagree and honestly if we were agreeing on everything the discussion would be pointless.

I can understand the need to close a thread when people insult each other or, when they stigmatise a religion or group, but there wasn't any such thing on that thread. I could deeply disagree with some posts, found some answer sharp but it was nothing but debate and, all together that thread was treating a broad way a, not only sensitive, but important topic.

I'm not attacking Liz for who she could be (I've no doubt she's some respectable person) but for what she did (ending a thread about how to answer terrorists and terrorism).
Paizo is honest enough to accept (often unjustified) critics about their products, so I don't understand she locked a thread for a critic (even violent) against terrorists.

And invoking "advocating violence" against DAESH as a reason is even indecent.
I was sharp but not going too far, what's going to far (whichever the way we think we should stop it) is what's happening inside DAESH's controlled territory.

Dear Liz,

I just saw you locked a thread because it's "advocating for violence against people and religious groups has no place on Paizo's forums".

It's true, it could be advocated that this thread was about using violence against people and a religious group. Lets be even more precise, that thread was for some posts arguing about killing human being belonging to DAESH; DAESH masquerading itself as a Muslim, therefore as a religious, group.

I do agree writing about killing humans is, at least, bad if not evil. And therefore can't be tolerated. I've no doubt you think you do your job right, but were you understanding what this thread was really about? I don't say were you reading it, I'm sure you did, I'm saying understanding.

DAESH is a group that define itself as religious. A group that (besides occasional international terrorist acts) is abducting an killing minorities, selling people as slaves (boys & girls age 1 to 9 yo for $165), harvesting organs from people they kill to sell them, raping and transforming women not sharing their belief in sex-slaves and supporting the wedding with 13 yo girls. I won't mention burning war prisoners alive, mass executions and beheadings.
Even Al-Qaida (an organization well-known for its kind heart and gentleness) consider them too extreme!

A religious group? It depends on what you consider a religion is. Muslim? Not if you consider the Muslim world and scholars see them as an abomination. And most probably now, because of them Muslims are shunned when not discriminated all over the world.

Of course it's not to Paizo to solve DAESH problem and, definitely your everyday's life is not much disturbed by them. I've no doubt you do your job and, can't do anything against it. I could be ironical mentioning the people driving the Jews to extermination camps were arguing the same, but it'd be mean.

So, back to my introduction words, I do agree that wishing people death is bad and ugly. But I'm telling you, I wish these people dead, and the thread you locked was just about how appropriate or inappropriate various reactions could be as a real and definitive solution. And people were offering a broad range of solutions, not only bombings.
As you read, I wished DAESH eradication. As you do you job well I've no doubt you will inform the competent authorities that someone in your forum is supporting not only violence against terrorists but their death. If your justice wants to hear about it, I will surrender myself. It'll be my pride!

Now, you know that many people (men, women, children) you never heard about suffer everyday a hell they don't deserve. What is your message to them, "Please don't scream to loud, you're disturbing my work?"
There's another way to support evil, without doing anything, it's closing your eyes or sometime closing threads.

Best regards,

Killing minorities: inorities)
Extortion: s.html?_r=1
Slavery: c-state-the-younger-the-better
Organs harvesting: -bloody-trade-human-organs-Iraqi-ambassador-reveals-doctors-executed-not-ha rvesting-body-parts.html

Orfamay Quest, you should read about DAESH a bit broadly, and not to try to make rhetoric.
Your comparison to the US or Israel is just nonsense.
There are flying fish, still, you can't say they're birds.

If you don't see the difference with other terrorists groups you need to read and listen a bit more.

The closest comparaison, without of course the political, industrial and military power, is the Third Reich.
Think DAESH is just like what we're used too and you'll wake-up painfully.

Now, you can argue that the sun is revolving around Earth and, if you're technical and get enough references you might think yourself convincing. But you'd rather ask yourself about your usefulness.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

DAESH is something special, I'm tempted to say: new in modern history (maybe some knowledgeable people here will precise that point).

By new I mean gathering several specific characteristics. They're relying to terrorism warfare, but also established on a territorial area they control more or less; they have access to large ressources; they try to structure themselves as a state. And, last but not least, DAESH tries to establish a fascist regime that has no other purpose but the extermination of all humans not supporting their believes, and the destruction of all material constructions and crafts they don't support. They negate almost all (if not all) forms of art and, consider some humans have no rights, no integrity, and can therefore be owned indefinitely by someone they consider rightful (which means they legitimate slavery).

It's this I name DAESH and this that should be eradicated.

Will survivors try to reform another group, I've no doubt some will try. But if we act smartly, dont bomb and shoot blindly, it'll be much more difficult for them to restart something.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

DAESH isn't that strong it mainly thrived because it wasn't considered a priority nor a a significant threat. All this changed now.

The alliance that France tries to built would be very hard to oppose for DAESH, not only France, the US, Russia and some others countries will bomb them, but the strikes will be coordinated and linked to attacks on the ground by Russian, Kurds and Iranian troops (not to mention Western special forces).
All together, all in coordination and toward a for a common objective.

They'll loose their strongholds one by one and, if you look at a map they don't have any way out.
On the north Turkey that for a while was closing at least one eye but, since the market bombing and with NATO's pressure, will fight them (or at least not let them out that way).
On the east: Iran and Russia allies. The first will be very happy to kill them both for political and religious reasons. The second didn't appreciate much the Russian plane bombing and will be eager to explain them attacking Russia was a dire mistake.
On the south Jordan and Iraq. The last is under US and Iran influence, therefore no option that way. Jordan has still in mind they were burning alive in a cage one of their pilot (that was bombing them).
Lebanon seems the weak point but its borders are under international scrutiny and therefore (discret but efficient) protection.

The best option would be to go to Afghanistan but it means having access to some teleportation technology...
More seriously DAESH is not strong enough to attack and has no road to retreat. They're cornered and given enough will from the EU, US and Russia, they'll be eradicated.

It seems I might be right, France will ask United Nations to give the right to eradicate DAESH, at the same time all European Union members will be ask to provide assistance (using the assistance obligation when a member is attacked) and the French president will meet both Obama and Putin, most probably to gather a major international alliance.
I won't surprised if NATO is also directly implied.

I think it's the beginning of the end for DAESH. Terrorists isolated themselves and help the world to ally against them.
Lets see the next episode...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

War is matter of money, propaganda and alliances.
I wonder how DAESH will manage in the close future.

France was increasing its attacks against DAESH over the last few months, and this terrorist attack will only enforce the airstrikes (and probably also the assassination program France is conducting for the past few years).

DAESH propaganda will also be more difficult in France as their blind terror act killed several muslims. So even those who didn't like the caricatures understand they are targets.

Last but not least, France wasn't seeing (that) positively the games of Russia and Iran. Now most probably we'll consider we've to chose the least of two evil. It means DAESH is now facing NATO + Russia + Iran and their respective allies. Knowing DAESH is also fighting with Al-Qaida they'll start feeling a bit lonely...

Anyway, I think it's time to get rid of them definitely.

It's not an history thread but during WWII, the Allied bombing killed around 50,000 civilians in Normandy. Civilians still supported and helped Allied troops as much as they could. "No one complained" for these dozens of thousands of innocent victims, they were (and are still) considered the price to pay for a greater good!

Also, considering the development of Christian faith in Europe, many people were slaughtered in Middle-Age for refusing to convert to this new religion (this before, during and after the Crusades).

Back to this campaign it is designed to have players question the concepts of good, evil, faith and religion. Some won't like, others will; still for many players it will be something new and different.

From many religions point of view, mass killing faithful followers to have them entering Heaven is not obviously evil.
Religions considering soul as immortal, consider the body has nothing but a very temporary vessel. It's a vessel you have to respect has it was given by the god(s), but having it destroyed is not such a big deal, nor suffering.
If you take Christian religions, that you are poor, sick and die at 12 yo after a horrible lifetime or, that you're rich, healthy and die at 100 yo after a wonderful lifetime doesn't make much difference.

In religions reality is everything but reality. It's kind of a "cosmic MMORPG", and destroying players' avatars, even massively, is not obviously evil.
All this doesn't mean that people here supporting the idea that a LG deity can't call for a massive killing of his followers (that paladins can't follow this) are wrong but if they consider gods to be gods, they can't either be so sure about it.

Again, if you take the full picture, this campaign is much more than a paladin trap.
I personally consider that you have to respect characters and not to strip them from any part of their powers/abilities. If you know the full campaign will be inside a city you can forbid druids from the beginning, but not letting one enter the game to find he/she can't really enjoy his/her character.
This campaign is to have characters questioning themselves about their relationship to reality and divine.

Bloodrealm wrote:
What are the Clerics, Inquisitors, etc. of this reported "Lawful Good" deity instructed to do? What are they doing? What is happening to/happens to them?

I wasn't thinking this thread only as a paladin one, I used paladin as someone strongly linked to a specific good deity's faith. I think the clerics, inquisitors, oracles, etc... would react the same way(s) described by the various contributors of this thread.

LazarX wrote:
Somehow we've got a new generation of DMs who think that putting Paladins in no-win morality traps is the way to develop their street cred as "edgy".

I'll take the "new generation of DMs" as a compliment.

It's not a trap to make a paladin (or any other Good class) fall or any player having his/her character humiliated, it's more about experiencing something different.

A paladin trap would be to send him/her to negotiate a peace treaty with an evil enemy ambassador after being defeated...

alexd1976 wrote:
Charon's Little Helper wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

If I were playing a paladin in this scenario, I would probably switch to antipaladin and try to save as many lives as possible...

I'd probably just take my character sheet and go home. I don't want to spend my free time dealing with that sort of catch-22 gotcha style DMing.

Yeah, or that.

There is a reason Paladins are so rare.

I recall a thread where someone playing a Fighter gave himself the restrictions of a Paladin for roleplaying reasons (very cool, IMO), then the GM cooked up a no-win scenario, told the PC he had fallen...

I can only imagine how smug that player must have been when he informed the GM that he hadn't been playing a Paladin at all.

GMs can be jerks about that stuff for some reason.

It's hard to think so but we all have different ways to play, still it's RPG!

Some DM & players enjoy more complex adventures. True, you can't solve this with a d20 roll (no matter how high is your BAB) but, sometimes, playing a "Kobayashi-Maru style" adventure (without cheating) is a great pleasure.

I don't try to convince anyone here.
If you're not interested by this tread, use your right to remain silent (and invisible)!
Again thanks to all contributions.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Otherwhere wrote:
Sadly, to be true to their faith, at least 1 paladin would have to remain behind as he cannot kill himself after he has helped kill his brother/sister paladins. Makes kind of a cool "tragic hero" to be forced to make that ultimate sacrifice, and perhaps remain in Hell despite having been the most faithful of all his order.

You're definitely right.

Some say Judas was the most faithful and trustworthy of all the disciples of Jesus and was therefore chosen to make the most dirty of all jobs!

Gilfalas wrote:

Why would a LG deity not just use their godly power to end their worshippers lives painlessly in their sleep if they have come to the conclusion that the world needs to end?

If they have the power to destroy the world surely they have the power to painlessly end their followers lives and bring them into paradise?

Said another way, I reject the validity of your very premise and question. It makes 0 sense unless looked at through the filter of a RAW game rule question with no thought to story or common sense in world building.

If you consider gods logic and approach being the same like mortals' ones, you reduce them to superhumans. This is the logic of Greek/Roman religions but many religions consider gods' logic to be unreachable by man. As a philosopher said once, God's being unlimited a limited (mortal) mind can't embrace him nor understand him.

Read The Apocalypse and you'll see my approach of a world ending is not "0 sense".

First sorry if that question was answered thousands of time.
Second, thanks for giving me so many new perspectives about it.

I wasn't giving much more detail because it's to consider that gods are supposed to have insights beyond what mortals can have and, as deities, very seldom explain, debate or justify their decisions to mortals.

This wasn't planned for Golarion but for a campaign I'm developing. I want to fill players with doubt without breaking the alignment system. Are they embracing evil or failing good? Can they question they deity's word or will? Can they, as faithful followers, consider their deity is betraying his ethos? Could mortals find answers/solutions the gods couldn't? If they can, should mortals still worship the gods?

From the answers here I can see such command should divide the cult and considering the importance of the situation this division should quickly end as a religious/civil war.
As a paladin, it's one thing to kill an "evil by birth" orcish warlord who slaughtered a village; it's another to kill a paladin brother in arms (you know and consider for years) who faithfully follows your deity's command.
It should be a campaign filled with doubts.

Otherwise, is killing innocent children/babies evil for a deity?
I'm not that sure God is considered evil in Christian religion, even if He decided the death of Egypt's firstborns. Not only the children (and most probably some babies) of the oppressing ruling elite but even the children of their slaves (Exodus 11:4-6)...

Lets assume a ruling LG decides to end the world and take to heaven most souls. Forbidding suicide in his ethos he gave to his most faithful followers and paladins the order to kill all the population, especially the sinless ones.

1. How should paladins of that deity react?
2. Accepting the order, would paladins keep their status and alignment?
3. If some paladins refuse, can they still be paladin?
4. If paladins refusing loose their status, what should be their new alignment?

I find quite interesting to compare the film ratings given to the movie 50 Shades of Grey according to the countries it was released in, as it might underline how culturally different we are inside "Western world".
Not discussing the quality of books or adaptation, I observe this (very) soft erotica movie is restricted to 17+ yo in the US, to 15+ in Australia, to 18+ in the UK, to 18+ in Canada (but to 16+ in Quebec), and to 12+ in France!

Quite often people use religion to explain prudishness but I'm surprised to observe that you could paint nude bodies on churches walls five hundred years ago while you can't post the same on Facebook today.
So is it really a matter of religion? Is Quebec so culturally different from Ontario to justify a difference? Is our body representations so different depending on our passport?

It's terrific to think that intelligence (even artificial) could end Human race while stupidity allowed it to thrive for some many thousands years...
God is definitely a trickster!

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even considering that it was a terrible mistake, why not firing the officer from police forces?

If it's possible to fire a firewoman posing topless it should be possible to consider shooting dead unarmed people as an inappropriate (or excessive) behavior too, no?

Like many people all around the world I saw images of police violence, I heard or read about American policemen shooting teenagers or children, and I'm puzzled. I don't judge but try to understand.

From abroad it seems to me some policemen act like an occupation army's soldiers: "I identify a potential threat in a hostile zone, being the most likely target in the area, no caring much as these people are not mine (if not openly my enemy), I shot. If I was right I saved my life, if I was wrong this violent behavior will intimidate locals. Last but not least, as I'm in a warzone I'm protected and won't be prosecuted as long as I'm not committing a war crime (rape, mass slaughter, etc...)".

On the other hand I always thought the job of police was to bring suspects to justice or die trying. Which means you can be killed because you don't shoot first.
It's more difficult (and sometime more dangerous) but the main difference with the soldier is that you operate in your own country and, logically, among the people you create a nation with.
Besides, if you're afraid to be the target of criminals, you can always choose another profession.

To those who know American police and policemen I've the following questions:
- Why it seems the few policemen using excessive violence are covered and not sanctioned (even "just" fired)?
- Why policemen shoot so quickly? Considering only force will solve the problem.
- Is it that these policemen are fearful or that they want to enforce a morale or a concept of society of their own?
- Does killing someone as a policeman improves your image among your colleagues?

Like many I saw the official trailer of the upcoming Star Wars movie, like many I have (too) high expectations and I'm afraid to revive the awful experience of Episode I...

In the trailer everything seems great, everything but this new lightsaber concept. J. J. Abrams is very creative but sometimes "less is more" and I'm afraid this new lightsaber is much too much.
I know you have to trust the movie director the way you trust your DM, but I'm afraid that J. J. Abrams will fail the Sith the same way he failed Khan, making them more visual while removing all substance from them.

I wish I'm wrong, I wish you'll convince me, I wish I won't be disappointed next year by Episode VII.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

They all know the recipe:
a good scenario + good actors (acting) + a good director to manage it all the best way

It's quite easy to do but if you try to have a war without victim or blood it gonna be complicated...

I only expect a good (real) villain; I'm not even asking him (or "the tall one her") to be as good as Vader, just good enough to be impressive.

I also dream to see an Ewok and Gungan extermination camp but I'm afraid I'm asking too much... still...

Pathfinder needs a second edition as it starts to be confusing if not messy with creation of different classes.
I'd say a revised edition more than a second edition. Races need to be better balanced (as shown by Advanced Races book), maybe alignments should be limited to Good/Neutral/Evil only.

Even if I love almost all classes there are too many of them now (do we really need the Sorcerer and the Wizard if there is the Arcanist?), maybe they can manage to keep a few core classes with (many) variants.
Do we also need a combat system that is grid based?

The alignment system is flawed otherwise this question had been solved decades ago.

Gygax made a mistake mixing two of his main influences (The Lord Of The Rings, and Elric saga), one opposing Good to Evil, the other using Law, Chaos and Balance.
As the system is "corrupted" from its start, neither D&D iterations nor Pathfinder was able to fix it (the "most acceptable" might be the approach of Palladium).

The 9 alignments are too caricatural to describe human behavior or even fictional characters. The original D&D had only Good/Neutral/Evil and it was working perfectly well, Stormbringer/Elric RPG had Law/Balance/Chaos and it was working perfectly well. Mix both and people will still try to understand or fix it 35 years later...!

Not insulting Yellowsweetie, maybe there was a bit of irony or pedantry (as underlined by our educated Anklebiter) but nothing more.

Anyway, it's always better to post a bit less and check a bit more...

A merged space agency between the US and Russia!?! NASA at the mercy of private sector...

You published your thread too early Yellowdingo, it's not yet April 1st...

Vod, don't be rude with Yellowdingo, he has reading and understanding difficulties. Moreso, you can easily confuse countries like Poland, Hungary, Ireland, Portugal or Finland as they share the same borders, culture and language...

I wasn't following this tread for a while but I think there are quite a few good news since last month.

Even if ebola virus is killing less people in Africa than hamburgers and soda in the US it's still quite a threat. But the very good news is that a treatment seems to work.
Actually, ebola virus might be the first positive side effect of terrorism wars. Until the mid-2000s ebola was nothing but a virus killing poor Black Africans, which means far from enough to finance the research for a cure.
But the fear of a terrorist use of the virus (against western countries) financed many research programs to find a cure and, we're very close to get it.

Most probably Africans will continue to die of ebola but we won't. The world is back to perfection, we are safe!

yellowdingo wrote:
Bill McGrath wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
China unifies africa into a single communist state to fight ebola and terrorism...
Yeah that's not difficult at all. I mean it's not like it's a continent of a billion people with thousands of distinct identities.
If they all die from ebola, the foreign occupier takes all.

If you know a little bit about Africa you should underline that to unify the African continent into a unique country you'll need at least a few centuries. Now, even if you consider Africans as nothing but brainless starving Blacks, you should understand that even ebola is not enough to kill them all. Africa is over a billion people, the virus would (indirectly) destroy occidental economies long before killing all Africans. Maybe it's why the US are sending troops...

yellowdingo wrote:

ebola outbreak in italy

Is it now a matter of time before ISIS sends 'suicide bombers' into Africa to get infected by ebola and spread it world wide?

Bio terrorism is very very very very complicated to do, and it's not that easy to contaminate someone with the virus after. It's much easier to crash a plane on a tower...

JohnLocke wrote:

Angsty - well, he just seems to like trolling.

Irreverent maybe, arrogant possibly and, passionate definitely. So if it's the definition of "trolling", I claim it. But as you're from a country that was never able to think by itself I can understand you find my way of being... disturbing.

Gaberlunzie wrote:

Between Angstspawn and Vlad, I think we have a full set of the various kinds of lawful evil.

I'd rather say pro-Russian versus pro-France, definitely loyal to our respective countries. Evil?? I'd love to live in a world where Vlad or I would represent evil...

Vlad Koboroff wrote:

... Angsty,though.He looks like a nice guy,who watches too much propaganda. For the last 20 years.

Which propaganda are you speaking about? The one telling Soviet Union is 99% gulag political prisonners and 1% savage gulag keepers? Or, would you dare call propaganda a song by Sting questioning "if Russians love their children too"?

You're right I was born and raised in a time, in a place, that makes me partial, oriented, biased... I know it, which still makes me more open-minded than most naives assuming the ready-to-think ideas they have in mind are their own (not speaking about you Vlad).
By the way Vlad, stop writing I'm "a nice guy", you're ruining a reputation it took me decades to build.

Pink Dragon wrote:
Canada, like all of North and South America, had inhabitants before Europeans (Spanish, French and British) came and murdered many of them and drove the rest into oppression for the greater glory of the homeland.

I've to admit it was very impolite!

JohnLocke wrote:
Before the brits drove them out in one of France's many, umm, let's call them "strategic withdrawals".

Actually after sending there our convicts and prostitutes we considered it wasn't a real loss to give it to British to erase a war debt. It seems we were right as the Brits dropped it later when they understood it was worthless.

JohnLocke wrote:

I heard about it, it's a former French colony, isn't it?

JohnLocke wrote:
I'm not sure you know what country I'm a citizen of, my friend...

And which country are you from, my friend???

JohnLocke wrote:
I have a conscience, which apparently you do not. I can regret what I did when I was younger, and try to live my life by a new set of moral guidelines.

Drama queen! You should subscribe for Eurovision you'll get good a chance to win...

JohnLocke wrote:
What were you doing for the first 20 years of your life, THIEF? As a good capitalist knows, you ain't entitled to any handouts, boy. Weren't you paying sales tax on shower soap or anything?

I was studying and working part time in a RPG store. But I'm not sure someone raised in Soviet Union might understand the concept of work or productivity...

And you, what were you doing in the 90s? Selling the remains of your country to buy used shoes from West?

Vlad Koroboff wrote:
And you know what Russia does with the aggressors.

So far, after Cold War the score is 1-0 for us...

But don't worry we're gallant enough to take great care of your widows.

JohnLocke wrote:

I've seen active combat in Afghanistan, I've seen people die for no good reason other than the Wests big imperial ambitions. If not one more single young person was sent off to die for someone elses' ambitions I'd be overjoyed. But Russia isn't going to be walked over by the US, the EU, anyone. Keep pushing them, and they'll push back, hard.

How will you know where to stand when you're so ignorant of basic issues?

It's your problem if you engage yourself in a conflict without knowing why, I can only be sorry for you if your parents considered brains as an optional extra.

Many years ago I also volunteered and been part of a conflict, I knew why and still have no regret about it.
It was the first time I saw Russian hobo paratroopers, forgotten by their bankrupted country the pitiful guys were selling the gas from their vehicles to buy food!

JohnLocke wrote:

So, they're outraged at Russia's vicious, criminal invasion of Ukraine but have no actual proof it's happening. Yes, that sounds very much like the UN doing what it does best - nothing.

Also, to any Ukrainian shills: if Russia did invade, you and everyone else would know it, trust me. There'd be smoking craters where your neo-nazi formations once were beating hasty retreats, twisted burning rubble where your air force once flew, and Porkyshenko would be found dead, drowned under one of his own chocolate fountains, before the protest mobs in Kiev could get a hold of him.

EDIT: the preview for the video on CBC's site is hilarious - looks like one truck is about to mount the other for some hot wartime lovin' :-)

EDIT: from RT - "Whenever there was any mention of someone actually seeing Russian tanks, it seemed a mobile phone was never on hand to take a photograph." Funny how that works, huh? We have more evidence of ghosts and UFO's than of Russian invasions.

Are you so naive (or worse) to think the USA or other major countries have no satellites over Ukraine?

Is it possible Russia ignores there are satellites? Just impossible.
It means Russia (Putin??) doesn't care what others countries think, it wants total control over Ukraine and doesn't care about any democratic issue.
As Russia was attacking several European countries over the last years, Western countries will consider Russia will continue after Ukraine. So they won't give up Ukraine, they'll make the conflict last, the time for NATO to reorganize its troops in Europe.

I envy your happiness JohnLocke, most probably you loved Cold War and regret it. I don't.
Russia is a great country and most Russians are nice people, that's sad for me to have to consider we'll have, again, to poison each other's lives.
I'm sad but I know on which side I'll stand.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Angstspawn wrote:

Nice photos but nothing more; you could take the same in any of the five richest countries of the world.

I saw a documentary about the US a few month ago, people were coming from hundreds of mile to be able to access to free medical care or dentists. I was amazed! In France medical access is almost for free and homeless have access for free to dentist.
If someone was taking photos, some people could think France is richer than the US, but no...

I've no doubt you've got a lot of nice books describing the world Anklebiter, but really, you should travel. The world is not perfect but it's nicer than what you can usually read.

I wonder if you have lost track of the exchange, Citoyen. You said "nobody starves in EU," hence the pictorials.

I'm not really sure how pointing out that there is poverty and hunger in even richer countries is a counterpoint, but, then, I rarely understand what you're saying.

I know, pointing at the Moon there's still a risk some will focus on your finger...

I just make a difference between poor people, someone checking in garbage, homeless and... starving. Which mean not only eating badly or being hungry, but risking to die because you can't (over a significant amount of time) eat anything.
There's nothing great depending on social help but starving is something else.

I won't again take the flying fish example, but I tell you again people aren't starving in the EU.

Nice photos but nothing more; you could take the same in any of the five richest countries of the world.
I saw a documentary about the US a few month ago, people were coming from hundreds of mile to be able to access to free medical care or dentists. I was amazed! In France medical access is almost for free and homeless have access for free to dentist.
If someone was taking photos, some people could think France is richer than the US, but no...

I've no doubt you've got a lot of nice books describing the world Anklebiter, but really, you should travel. The world is not perfect but it's nicer than what you can usually read.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Angstspawn wrote:

Flying fish also do exist, but it doesn't mean you've to consider fish fly!

Got to Portugal, Spain and Greece my dear Anklebiter.

I'd love to. Could you lend me $1,000? I'll pay you back, I swear.

It's the main difference between bankers and banks, bankers don't lend money.

Now, I suggest you to contact Ukraine separatists and make that trip part of infiltration operation. You should add that to avoid being detected you should move through luxury hotels (only because it's necessary) and ask for $100,000. It's very cheap considering the price of military equipment and the promotional support you'll give them.

Otherwise, maybe a Greek bank can lend you $1,000...

Flying fish also do exist, but it doesn't mean you've to consider fish flies!

Got to Portugal, Spain and Greece my dear Anklebiter. Even if your first motive will be to support the cause of these beautiful countries I can guaranty you'll have wonderful holidays. You already know they are nice people but (maybe) you'll discover all the delicious different dishes and food they have. Culturally they are all old countries with wonderful monuments, very modern hotels (or houses if you're hosted) and impressive beaches.
Most probably you'll meet there people from all countries of EU and it'll be for you not only a wonderful experience but the opportunity for you to see if they starve.

Really, it not a joke, take a flight to Portugal and from there by car go up to Greece.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Anyway, I don't buy $30 RPG books, but if I did, I'd make sure they were printed in the People's Republic of China.

I agree with you, I also support slavery and children labor. If not happy about it they can still sell their organs.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
No, I've never been to Portugal, but I am wondering how wise a choice it is to join the EU when so many of their member-states' populations are being given the choice of emigrate or starve.

It's just ridiculous, no one starves anymore in the EU. Ask our grandparents they know what starving was! A study shows that, in average, we throw away 15% of our food still unpacked!

Portugal is ranked 41 among all the countries of this planet, Greece is ranked 29. I agree ranking doesn't mean everything but it gives an idea.
Life isn't perfect in the EU, we have a crisis (like many countries), but never forget that the crisis in a very rich country is far beyond the dream of growth of a very poor country.
We can, and should, try to get a better and better life but we have an obligation to be decent. When some people on this planet are confronted to survival we just have to face either paying our mobile phone bill or buying a video game!

We have to be decent in our complain, suffering is something we never saw for most of us. We have no obligation to save this people but the least we can do is to respect them and not to call our spoiled children caprices, suffering. Be decent!

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
That's the most ridiculous bullshiznit I've seen in quite a while, Citoyen Banker's Mouthpiece. How old are?

I'm 45 Anklebiter and paying taxes for the last 25 years. I do remember these countries entering the EU, I do remember how we were supporting them. I do remember the choices they made, some were good, some weren't (like for anyone). I do remember them begging to enter EU. I do remember us accepting and why. I do remember how much it cost us, which parts of our industry and agriculture we sacrificed.

I do remember and I went to many neighbor or farther countries in Europe. I do remember the way of life from the 80s to now. I do remember the speech of political leaders (even communists). I don't get b&@$%!+!ed by tales, simply because I do remember what I saw and heard.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
How long ago was it that the Portuguese government advised young people that if they wanted a future they should leave?

It's an option Portuguese use from time to time. Most of people from Portuguese origin we have in France came during the 70s and 80s. It's the way they do, more so considering the rate of development of some of their former colonies (still Portuguese-speaking) it would be stupid for them not to get advantage of the situation.

But considering Portugal, I'm sure you directly experienced how was the life there before entering the EU and how it is now.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Earlier this year, I lent $300 to a co-worker that I'm never going to get back, so I'm afraid I can't lend you billions of euros for you to spend on my products, Citoyen BM. It's true, though, I am quite supportive of Greece cancelling their debt...and other things.

How generous from you Anklebiter, but you're still very greedy for a communist, you had to give him (and not lend) half your salary to your friend. How much money you spend in RPG and egoistic leisures and activities while people all around the world need money just to survive.

Yes, you enjoy your confort. You support if it doesn't cost you too much... Soft belly communism is nothing but hypocrite capitalism. How many time you decided to purchase a colorful game book knowing (or purposefully ignoring) $30 is a monthly income for many people on that planet.

$300 is someway what I gave to Greece through my taxes, what about you? How much did you give to the country beyond empty words of support?
It's not enough to get dress like a rebel to be one...

Gaberlunzie wrote:
"We asked them back nothing in exchange except to dictate their politics, remove the elected government and replace it with an undemocratic puppet regime!"

No one dictates Greece what they have to do, but so far I know only two ways to come out of debt: either you get more money or, you reduce your expenses (most of time you've to do both).

If you know another way my dear Gaberlunzie I'm the first to be interested in your solution.

So for sure when your options become that reduced you feel extremely limited, it's the reason my mother always told me don't contract debts. I think it's a bit extreme but definitely when you start taking a loan to pay your taxes or to buy food for the month you've to understand you're in a serious situation.
If you do nothing it'll turn critical, it's what happened to Greece.
I understand people need and deserve their retirement or social help but they had to feel more concerned about it ten years ago.

Now, you can consider not paying your debt but if you still need to lend money to finish the month, and the next one, and the next one, I'm afraid it's not an option either...

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

"The fact that continued self-interest is driving the French and German ruling classes’ position towards Greece, can be seen in the fact that while demanding that the Greek state cut social spending, no demands have been made for it to cut its military spending. The central reason why is that the Greek state is the largest purchaser of weapons from Germany’s arms industry and the third largest customer of French military exports. Consequently, the French and German states have placed no brakes on the level of the Greek state’s military spending. Thus, the Greek state has continued with high levels of military spending: in 2010 alone it spent 7.1 billion Euros on its military."

I don't have the knowledge or interest to go digging around in the financial press about the arrangements of French and German capitalism but if the French and German arms manufacturers aren't in some way connected to the French and German banks (a la Comrade Lenin's pamphlet), I'll stop posting in this thread.

All this for 7.1 billions euros, are you serious? Do you mean France and Germany gave Greece several dozen of billions to get 7.1 billions? Do you mean two countries whose economy represents 6,000 billions are risking to see their economies crash for 7.1 billions? Really??

Greek are refusing military expenses limitation because of an ages-old feud with Turkey.
Now France and Germany are not telling to Greece to make social cut, they just ask it to be able to pay the debts it willingly contracted from banks.
If you're so much supportive my dear Anklebiter maybe you can give me a bit of money, or accept to back me up for a loan. I'll pay back with smiles.

1 to 50 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>