Well basically, Valentine broke a few forum rules by leeching a photo. He always had this spammy quality to him, so I wasn't too surprised when he got suspended the first time. When he came back, he decided it would be funny to break the same rule again with the photo, ended up getting busted and got suspended for another month. The next day, however, his brother came on and made an account on the same computer, which is a big no-no and it caused him and Valentine to be banned from the site.
I see, that's sad. :/
btw: So how do you see black today? Is it still possible to play mono?
Either way, I'm trying to win the tourney tomorrow, and guess which color I'm going to choose?
Well, at least the artwork of SM looks appealing.
But doesn't anybody get mad at the white board cleaner they made?
"Destroy all non-white creatures".
This just doesn't feel white in my opinion. Should have been a black card.
Well, Shadowmoor doesn't look very appealing to me right at the moment.
I don't know why, but it just doesn't get me...
Especially the remake of Torture sucks big time. Can't they show us something new?
Thats exactly why this war has gone so badly, you can't kill an idea with bullets.
Actually, you can. You just have to aim at the head of the guy who has the idea. ^^
Though the US would be able to do this, they refuse to do it, because unlike terrorists (politically correct='freedom fighters'), they value human rights. Most people seem to forget this.
And aiming at civilians is not terrorism, if done by an army. It simply is an answer to asymetric warfare. I'm not a warmonger, but people seem to forget that the US is still a very moral country. Just compare it to the USSR. Imagine what would have happened, had they won the cold war...
It's weird to argue this with a German, but everything I've been taught in college state-side has said one thing: the huge debt and financial ruin Germany experienced between the end of WWI and a bit before the start of WWII was caused by the Allies (especially the UK and France, but all of them to some degree) forcing the German people to pay insane reparations. Weirdly enough, bankrupting a major country caused an economic crisis all across Europe (and eventually the US). All of the world, instead of seeing that it was caused by finatially screwing Germany, instead blamed the Germans and just sucked more funds out of them. The whole world was pointing their fingers at Germany when the Nazis came to power.
That's what I was originally saying, which is basically what you were saying as well.
German economy actually was on the way to stabilize before 1929. That's why the radical parties were loosing votes. And then the economy crashed in the US who then decided to pull off the money they gave to Europe. This led to the economic crisis all over Europe. Germany who had to pay reparations to the winners of WWI was affected the most. The end of the story is known: the radicals gained votes, the Nazis came out on top and Germany was in for 12 years fascism.
btw: I never heard about the whole world blaming Germany for the economic crisis back then.
The Holocaust (mass killings) began in 1942 and lasted for three years. The persecution of certain peoples by the government began almost right after Hitler came into power (Kristallnacht being the first major instance, as I remember, which happened in the late 30s). The accepted start of WWII is Sept. 1, 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. The accepted end is on V-J day, when Japan surrendered, on Aug. 15, 1945.
By Holocaust, I meant everything that had to do with murdering the jewish population of Europe. I should have been more accurate.
I was simplifying the events so that I could use them in my example, but killing the Jewish/Roma/Queer folks in the countries they conquered fits perfectly with my assessment. Once you've defined your stance so clearly by openly persecuting certain people (with the populace and your power hungry and dangerous "lessers" cheering you on) you can't just stop when your borders increase.
Well, it's not like every German supported the racist policy of the NSDAP.
In fact, only a minority fit into their master plan (blonde, blue-eyed, non-jewish).
In a fascist state, the people's will is ignored, so the real driving power behind the holocaust came from the Nazi elite (by elite, I mean political elite, not racial, mind you).
Btw, I'd just like to step back for a moment and comment on how weird it is that I'm defending the Nazis right now. (Look up "Dodavehu" to grasp why it's really weird.)
--
Don't worry, I don't think you are a Nazi!
I appreciate that you play devil's advocate. This always helps to see things from other perspectives and gives more insight on the subject.
Imagine for a second that you’re Supreme Chancellor Hitler. You’ve convinced thousands of people that they are the best and most powerful people in the world while the rest of the world insists on treating them like garbage for the sins of their fathers. You’re sitting on a brand new shiny military. If you didn’t go to war they’d lynch you, or at least see you as a liar and strip away your power. There’s not much more of an option than to blitzkrieg at that point.
Well, it was more a economical necessity than an ideological. Germany had made huge debts (militarization costs alot), so they had to expand and let their opponents pay the debts. It's not like the majority of Germans were keen on fighting another war. That's why Hitler made it look like Poland attacked Germany, so he could say the war is defensive.
So you do, and your fans are happy. But then they remember you other campaign promise. You’ve gathered a huge army of ruffians by appealing to their hatred of outsiders, but what can you do with them? You can’t very well exile them; you’d basically be sending soldiers to your enemies. You can follow Russia’s example and make some forced labor camps. Yeah, that’s a good idea. Only, after a few years there’s not enough room or resources to hold that many captives. What do you do? There’s really only one logical solution. The final one.
--
Well, as far as I know, the holocaust began before WWII started.
And I don't think they used the holocaust simply because they didn't have enough room or ressources.
They also killed jews in France and other occupied countries, and the Nazis put great effort in chasing them there, so your arguments don't really make sense...
There's no real reason not to vote for an atheist; unless they're an atheist first, and a politician second.
I could live with a president who is atheist first and a politician second.
If the world really needs something, it's more atheists in powerful positions!
Religion has been holding things back for so long now. These miserable idiots who call themselves believers have nothing to offer but lies, and all for only one reason: to gain power or to follow their brainwashed vision (which helps others to gain power).
I wouldn't vote for a candidate inspite of him being an atheist, I would vote for him solely because of the fact that he is atheist!
...no. Living in the Dark Ages is cheap. It's modernization that costs a boatload of money.
What I meant was that as long as they have money (through oil) they do not have to open themselves for our live style.
Oh, and don't forget that the west spends ridiculous amounts of money every year to support modernization in middle east.
The palastinians have received more money from the west than Europe was given by the Marhall Plan after WWII. Last time I checked they still weren't on the way to stabilize economicaly.
Just think about it...;)
Nonetheless, I think we both agree on the fact that the only reason for islamic countries being more important than other 3rd world countries is the great amount of oil they posses.
You think Western involvement in Middle Eastern affairs is helping fundamentalist Islam? If we stop being a source of exorbitant wealth to them, they might go as isolationist as pre-Perry Japan.
No, I'm not saying our involvement is helping radical islam, our money is.
Without western money, they will be forced to open themselves.
Suddenly, they will be the ones who want something from us, not vice versa.
And that is the moment they will have to change their radical/fundamentalist views, as they can no longer afford them.
I see, that's sad. :/
btw: So how do you see black today? Is it still possible to play mono?
Either way, I'm trying to win the tourney tomorrow, and guess which color I'm going to choose?
Nice to see the Mono-Black Clan still exists!
But doesn't anybody get mad at the white board cleaner they made?
"Destroy all non-white creatures".
This just doesn't feel white in my opinion. Should have been a black card.
I don't know why, but it just doesn't get me...
Especially the remake of Torture sucks big time. Can't they show us something new?
Looks like I'll be busy for some time to come, so please excuse my absence.
See ya
Actually, you can. You just have to aim at the head of the guy who has the idea. ^^
Though the US would be able to do this, they refuse to do it, because unlike terrorists (politically correct='freedom fighters'), they value human rights. Most people seem to forget this.
And aiming at civilians is not terrorism, if done by an army. It simply is an answer to asymetric warfare. I'm not a warmonger, but people seem to forget that the US is still a very moral country. Just compare it to the USSR. Imagine what would have happened, had they won the cold war...
I think he is referring to 'empirial overstretch'
German economy actually was on the way to stabilize before 1929. That's why the radical parties were loosing votes. And then the economy crashed in the US who then decided to pull off the money they gave to Europe. This led to the economic crisis all over Europe. Germany who had to pay reparations to the winners of WWI was affected the most. The end of the story is known: the radicals gained votes, the Nazis came out on top and Germany was in for 12 years fascism.
btw: I never heard about the whole world blaming Germany for the economic crisis back then.
By Holocaust, I meant everything that had to do with murdering the jewish population of Europe. I should have been more accurate.
Well, it's not like every German supported the racist policy of the NSDAP.
In fact, only a minority fit into their master plan (blonde, blue-eyed, non-jewish).
In a fascist state, the people's will is ignored, so the real driving power behind the holocaust came from the Nazi elite (by elite, I mean political elite, not racial, mind you).
Don't worry, I don't think you are a Nazi!
I appreciate that you play devil's advocate. This always helps to see things from other perspectives and gives more insight on the subject.
Well, it was more a economical necessity than an ideological. Germany had made huge debts (militarization costs alot), so they had to expand and let their opponents pay the debts. It's not like the majority of Germans were keen on fighting another war. That's why Hitler made it look like Poland attacked Germany, so he could say the war is defensive.
Well, as far as I know, the holocaust began before WWII started.
And I don't think they used the holocaust simply because they didn't have enough room or ressources.
They also killed jews in France and other occupied countries, and the Nazis put great effort in chasing them there, so your arguments don't really make sense...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
Please, read it.
This theory sounds far more realistic to me than creationism. I think the schools should rather teach this theory.
I could live with a president who is atheist first and a politician second.
If the world really needs something, it's more atheists in powerful positions!
Religion has been holding things back for so long now. These miserable idiots who call themselves believers have nothing to offer but lies, and all for only one reason: to gain power or to follow their brainwashed vision (which helps others to gain power).
I wouldn't vote for a candidate inspite of him being an atheist, I would vote for him solely because of the fact that he is atheist!
What I meant was that as long as they have money (through oil) they do not have to open themselves for our live style.
Oh, and don't forget that the west spends ridiculous amounts of money every year to support modernization in middle east.
The palastinians have received more money from the west than Europe was given by the Marhall Plan after WWII. Last time I checked they still weren't on the way to stabilize economicaly.
Just think about it...;)
Nonetheless, I think we both agree on the fact that the only reason for islamic countries being more important than other 3rd world countries is the great amount of oil they posses.
No, I'm not saying our involvement is helping radical islam, our money is.
Without western money, they will be forced to open themselves.
Suddenly, they will be the ones who want something from us, not vice versa.
And that is the moment they will have to change their radical/fundamentalist views, as they can no longer afford them.