Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Saturday Metaverse

View
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

40. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 3, 2014, 13:26 jdreyer
 
InBlack wrote on Mar 3, 2014, 06:39:
Why do you even bother with this (un)informed troll?? (Axis)

As for the situation in Ukraine, i think Kerry inadvertently said it best:

"You dont just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext"
- John Kerry on Russian troops entering Crimea

Oh my, the irony is sweetness itself....Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya? Need I go on???

Yeah, that's pretty lacking in self awareness on Kerry's part. He voted to invade Iraq. If I knew that Iraq had nothing to do with 9.11, then Kerry with all of his clearances and intel info must have known as well. Yet he still voted for invasion. Dumbass.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"Microsoft is the absent minded parent of PC gaming" - Verno
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 3, 2014, 10:15 Task
 
InBlack wrote on Mar 3, 2014, 06:39:
Why do you even bother with this (un)informed troll?? (Axis)

As for the situation in Ukraine, i think Kerry inadvertently said it best:

"You dont just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext"
- John Kerry on Russian troops entering Crimea

Oh my, the irony is sweetness itself....Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya? Need I go on???

Most people don't know this, but there is also another reason why the former Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Most people believed the Taliban was helped after the Soviets invaded, but the U.S. actually provoked the Soviets into invading (as it was in their Security interests of their border) by giving support to the Taliban months before the SU actually invaded.

The U.S./EU/NATO are doing the same thing now by supporting neo-nazi's in Ukraine in order to provoke the Russians, since again it is in their security interest as Ukraine is along their border, even though the SU no longer exists. While the U.S. has illegally overthrown 50 governments since 1945, the 'new' Russia has done no such thing.

This is all just a grand chess board played by Western Imperialism. Imperialists do this in order to retain geo-political power.
 
Avatar 37119
 
Playing: The Witcher 2, Dragon Age: Origins, FF8
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 3, 2014, 06:39 InBlack
 
Why do you even bother with this (un)informed troll?? (Axis)

As for the situation in Ukraine, i think Kerry inadvertently said it best:

"You dont just, in the 21st century, behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext"
- John Kerry on Russian troops entering Crimea

Oh my, the irony is sweetness itself....Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya? Need I go on???
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 16:19 Yosemite Sam
 
NewMaxx wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 16:37:
Yosemite Sam wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 16:31:
You telling me if say Guam fell into civil war the USA wouldn't use troops to secure their assets?

Um, you do realize that Guam is a territory of the US while the Ukraine is an independent country, right?

... and you realize Crimea is an independent territory within Ukraine that's Russian and made up of mostly Russian people and who's elected leader asked for Russian help? Wan't a better example then Guam? ok, Grenada, of course Grenada was never an American territory, didn't have a majority American population and AFAIK didn't have any American military bases to defend... sure didn't stop the USA from invading for their own personal political agenda.

General Assembly Resolution 38/7
 
Avatar 21539
 
CIV4 MOD http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=326525
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 16:14 Axis
 
No JD, what you did the last two times we disagreed is you simply said "Yes, Scotty says things so well, I couldn't have said it better and everyone should learn from him". Nothing specific about what should have been gleamed, just a generalized statement of praise for a bunch of words that have nothing to do with the only point I made - that being Obama is a lip service man who has no credibility in the international world.

Try to dispute that all you like, but you didn't - you deferred. That deference didn't apply or have any affect on the facts, nor on my (and most of America's) disappointment in our leadership.

I won't be part of a monologue where readers who comprehend can see it's obvious merits, - but those merits are not about my point. And Scott has the ability to eloquently post facts without those facts being pertinent to the original point. And if it weren't you, JD, I'd have been more dismissive. But I know you "aren't stupid" either, so I give the benefit of the doubt when you reply.

For the record once more - Clinton signed a treaty that guaranteed Ukraine and it's borders since they disarmed their nuke program. Obama stands up, issues warnings, pokes bee hives and shakes the tree in an attempt to look strong, but in the end looks weak as fuck as he has again and again. Putin calls his bluff. Now what? Are we supposed to be proud of the buffoonery?

It's Obama's catch 22, not mine, not yours. Don't pretend anyone in America wants a war and try to explain how it's not feasable as Scott did in response to my point that we want is a leader we can look to for answers -- and we don't have one.

As for wording - any wording that isn't praise for Obama gets called racist, rushie, whatever - there is no appeasement, no way of speaking without being immediately discarded thanks to the dems and their inability to take any responsibility and just push the blame game. So I don't sugar coat and get right to the point.

And nin, I know no one who acts more trollish than you. Rarely do you make any points, just trouble. Be happy you get community brown points for being a newser, but you don't have me fooled.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 14:58 eRe4s3r
 
HorrorScope wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 11:45:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 20:47:
So what does this mean? It means that military intervention on the part of the US/EU in the Ukraine to maintain its territorial integrity would necessitate a full-scale, medium-intensity war on land, on the sea, and in the air. Is keeping ethnically Russian, and Russian speaking Crimea a part of the Ukraine worth such a war to you? Or are you just interested in blustering and finding new ways to hate Obama?

Pretty much this. Is it impossible to leave the country and live elsewhere?

The Ukraine is neither part of the EU nor of Putins pseudo alliance so yeah, it'd be pretty damn hard to live the country. Nobody would let you stay long and without VISA you'd not even get anywhere. And who'd put out Visas right during a revolution?
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 14:49 jdreyer
 
HorrorScope wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 11:50:
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You're right, he needs to say and do this, "We are ending all wars today that involve our troops. If you attack us in anyway it will come back swift and strong unproportionate in the US favor."

I believe if there were a vote that general idea is what American's want. Not the world police, we never wanted that and actually hate it. We don't have children in the US to give up their lives to work out issues between other countries. I've never sat in a bleacher talking to parents of a future where our kids give up their lives over the squabbles between other countries. That is not acceptable.

Sort of like how no one fucks with China, they'll leave you alone if you leave them alone otherwise you got big problems.


I agree that we need to stop being the world police and having bases all over the globe. It's ridiculous.

As for China, they've been expanding their influence in Africa and other places around the world as well as being rather aggressive about claiming territory far from their home waters. The old insular China is going away in favor of a more aggressive international one.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"Microsoft is the absent minded parent of PC gaming" - Verno
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 14:48 nin
 
Here's the thing: I know you're not stupid

You're being far too kind.
 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 14:40 jdreyer
 
Axis wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 11:38:
jdreyer wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 02:05:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 01:00:
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You are aware that foreign leaders don't get their intelligence reports on Obama from Fox News, correct? I'm only marginally supportive of Obama at best, i.e. I think he has admirable qualities but has been mostly ineffective as a president, so don't get the impression that I think his record is of unbridled strength. But that said, "strength", and the perception of it, is more than a willingness to launch misguided invasions which bog down the better part of US military strength for a decade and empower regional adversaries. Certainly, if I were a foreign adversary, I would note Obama's caution to a fault, his tendency towards paralysis by analysis, and his domestic political weakness. I would note his signaling miscalculations as the Syrian Civil War escalated, i.e. having Assad call his bluff over the chemical weapons "red line", but conversely I would recognize the wisdom of not compounding that called bluff by intervening militarily in Syria in an attempt to save face, when such intervention is highly unlikely to serve US interests. Furthermore, I would note his ready willingness to violate the sovereign territory of allied states to launch cross-border special forces and drone raids to assassinate perceived threats to US national security. I would also note his willingness to project power when there is good reason to believe it can depose an adversary, i.e. Libya. In short, my assessment would be "cautious, reluctant to intervene, but if he believes US military intervention is likely to serve US interests, rather than a mere desire to appear tough, then he is likely to use it."

A really excellent analysis, SMA. I hope that it's not lost on Axis who appears really reluctant to allow nuance to color his one-dimensional take on the Obama presidency.

He's not praising Obama JD. His reply is a long winded monolog (Scott likes to hear himself) initiated with a liberal jab while attempting to deflect Obama's admitted ineffectiveness -- apparently lost on you JD, but certainly lost on many as they'd skim right after they rejoice at the Fox News comment, likely you did too.

Where in my comment did I say "Great job praising Obama SMA!" Axis? Oh, yeah, I didn't. Speaking of skimming, you must have skimmed my comment since you missed my point. The point is your hyperbolic "Obama bad!" comments show either a lack of understanding or intentional one-dimensional framing of Obama's actions. It means either your stupid or a troll. SMA provides a good analysis backed up with logical examples. The case he makes on Obama's foreign policy is solid, and I agree with most of it, though I may disagree with some of the underlying reasons for it.

Here's the thing: I know you're not stupid, so why be trollish? Why not argue on the merits? Why nut-pick and ignore the greater context? With your current methods you're not winning any arguments, nor are you changing any minds. You're just pissing people off. Do you get off on that? When you use Fox or Rush terminology (regardless of whether your watch/listen) for the prez or Dems, you come off as a Rush-bot and get called out for that. Is that your goal?

The intellectual right has been missing for a couple of decades now. It has left a vacuum. I'd love to hear and consider conservative solutions to any number of issues, including (especially) those that affect gaming and media, the subject of this blog. But what we get instead is the same old tired stuff that has been proven not to work: free market fundamentalism, trickle down economics, morality laws, etc. using the most underhanded techniques: strawmen arguments, obfuscation, astroturfing, racist dog whistling, etc. etc.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"Microsoft is the absent minded parent of PC gaming" - Verno
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 11:50 HorrorScope
 
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You're right, he needs to say and do this, "We are ending all wars today that involve our troops. If you attack us in anyway it will come back swift and strong unproportionate in the US favor."

I believe if there were a vote that general idea is what American's want. Not the world police, we never wanted that and actually hate it. We don't have children in the US to give up their lives to work out issues between other countries. I've never sat in a bleacher talking to parents of a future where our kids give up their lives over the squabbles between other countries. That is not acceptable.

Sort of like how no one fucks with China, they'll leave you alone if you leave them alone otherwise you got big problems.

We have the ability to simply not war in most cases and we don't, which means we fail. But there is money in it for the sick bastards who have to have control and will kill for it. So why we do what we do is no surprise.

This comment was edited on Mar 2, 2014, 11:57.
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 11:45 HorrorScope
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 20:47:
So what does this mean? It means that military intervention on the part of the US/EU in the Ukraine to maintain its territorial integrity would necessitate a full-scale, medium-intensity war on land, on the sea, and in the air. Is keeping ethnically Russian, and Russian speaking Crimea a part of the Ukraine worth such a war to you? Or are you just interested in blustering and finding new ways to hate Obama?

Pretty much this. Is it impossible to leave the country and live elsewhere?
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 11:38 Axis
 
jdreyer wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 02:05:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 01:00:
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You are aware that foreign leaders don't get their intelligence reports on Obama from Fox News, correct? I'm only marginally supportive of Obama at best, i.e. I think he has admirable qualities but has been mostly ineffective as a president, so don't get the impression that I think his record is of unbridled strength. But that said, "strength", and the perception of it, is more than a willingness to launch misguided invasions which bog down the better part of US military strength for a decade and empower regional adversaries. Certainly, if I were a foreign adversary, I would note Obama's caution to a fault, his tendency towards paralysis by analysis, and his domestic political weakness. I would note his signaling miscalculations as the Syrian Civil War escalated, i.e. having Assad call his bluff over the chemical weapons "red line", but conversely I would recognize the wisdom of not compounding that called bluff by intervening militarily in Syria in an attempt to save face, when such intervention is highly unlikely to serve US interests. Furthermore, I would note his ready willingness to violate the sovereign territory of allied states to launch cross-border special forces and drone raids to assassinate perceived threats to US national security. I would also note his willingness to project power when there is good reason to believe it can depose an adversary, i.e. Libya. In short, my assessment would be "cautious, reluctant to intervene, but if he believes US military intervention is likely to serve US interests, rather than a mere desire to appear tough, then he is likely to use it."

A really excellent analysis, SMA. I hope that it's not lost on Axis who appears really reluctant to allow nuance to color his one-dimensional take on the Obama presidency.

He's not praising Obama JD. His reply is a long winded monolog (Scott likes to hear himself) initiated with a liberal jab while attempting to deflect Obama's admitted ineffectiveness -- apparently lost on you JD, but certainly lost on many as they'd skim right after they rejoice at the Fox News comment, likely you did too.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 04:49 eRe4s3r
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 20:47:

So what does this mean? It means that military intervention on the part of the US/EU in the Ukraine to maintain its territorial integrity would necessitate a full-scale, medium-intensity war on land, on the sea, and in the air.

Nobody would do that simply because the Ukraine isn't in the Nato. We did not respond in Georgia, we will not in Ukraine. And we won't even care in a month unless Russia does something silly.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 02:19 Task
 
I don't know if this off topic or not, but this is a pretty good documentary that explains why corruption happens in the U.S. Its only on the topic of Oil, one topic of many connected issues to a large problem, but good information nonetheless. Most of the beginning is the disaster of the Gulf Spill, the hour mark it goes into the corruption of the White House.

The Big Fix - BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Cover up

Anyways, happy weekend all.
 
Avatar 37119
 
Playing: The Witcher 2, Dragon Age: Origins, FF8
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 02:05 jdreyer
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 2, 2014, 01:00:
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You are aware that foreign leaders don't get their intelligence reports on Obama from Fox News, correct? I'm only marginally supportive of Obama at best, i.e. I think he has admirable qualities but has been mostly ineffective as a president, so don't get the impression that I think his record is of unbridled strength. But that said, "strength", and the perception of it, is more than a willingness to launch misguided invasions which bog down the better part of US military strength for a decade and empower regional adversaries. Certainly, if I were a foreign adversary, I would note Obama's caution to a fault, his tendency towards paralysis by analysis, and his domestic political weakness. I would note his signaling miscalculations as the Syrian Civil War escalated, i.e. having Assad call his bluff over the chemical weapons "red line", but conversely I would recognize the wisdom of not compounding that called bluff by intervening militarily in Syria in an attempt to save face, when such intervention is highly unlikely to serve US interests. Furthermore, I would note his ready willingness to violate the sovereign territory of allied states to launch cross-border special forces and drone raids to assassinate perceived threats to US national security. I would also note his willingness to project power when there is good reason to believe it can depose an adversary, i.e. Libya. In short, my assessment would be "cautious, reluctant to intervene, but if he believes US military intervention is likely to serve US interests, rather than a mere desire to appear tough, then he is likely to use it."

A really excellent analysis, SMA. I hope that it's not lost on Axis who appears really reluctant to allow nuance to color his one-dimensional take on the Obama presidency.
 
Avatar 22024
 
"Microsoft is the absent minded parent of PC gaming" - Verno
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 2, 2014, 01:00 Scottish Martial Arts
 
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 23:58:
What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.

You are aware that foreign leaders don't get their intelligence reports on Obama from Fox News, correct? I'm only marginally supportive of Obama at best, i.e. I think he has admirable qualities but has been mostly ineffective as a president, so don't get the impression that I think his record is of unbridled strength. But that said, "strength", and the perception of it, is more than a willingness to launch misguided invasions which bog down the better part of US military strength for a decade and empower regional adversaries. Certainly, if I were a foreign adversary, I would note Obama's caution to a fault, his tendency towards paralysis by analysis, and his domestic political weakness. I would note his signaling miscalculations as the Syrian Civil War escalated, i.e. having Assad call his bluff over the chemical weapons "red line", but conversely I would recognize the wisdom of not compounding that called bluff by intervening militarily in Syria in an attempt to save face, when such intervention is highly unlikely to serve US interests. Furthermore, I would note his ready willingness to violate the sovereign territory of allied states to launch cross-border special forces and drone raids to assassinate perceived threats to US national security. I would also note his willingness to project power when there is good reason to believe it can depose an adversary, i.e. Libya. In short, my assessment would be "cautious, reluctant to intervene, but if he believes US military intervention is likely to serve US interests, rather than a mere desire to appear tough, then he is likely to use it."
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 1, 2014, 23:58 Axis
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 20:47:
Axis wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 14:06:
Hey Franken, how about you worry about the US and Britain's promise to Ukraine? That's a hell of a serious issue that NO ONE is reporting here in the US...

Obama will as usual do nothing... even when there's an 'international law' that Clinton signed...

Not that I want him to, but he's such a terrible representative of our country it's sickening. But ya, he'll just keep being "deeply concerned" or "strongly discouraged" or some other useless statement he makes as he sits back and tries to forget he's in shoes way to big for his tiny feet.

Axis, you claim to have been in the military, so clearly you must know something about military affairs. Tell me this: what military presence do we have in Ukraine? What naval presence do we have in the Black Sea? How far away is the nearest US military installation of any size? How far away is the nearest US military installation of a size sufficient to support war in Ukraine?

The answers, respectively, are none, none, about 350 miles away in Bulgaria, and about 800 miles away in Germany. Think about this for a moment: we don't have any airbases close enough to Ukraine to provide a credible deterrent from the air. We could make a handful of aerial tanker supported air strikes as a show of moral support but that's about it. Likewise, the experience of the Gulf and Iraq War demonstrate that it takes months to build up a credible land based force on foreign shores, so the Army is out as an immediate deterrent. What about the Navy? Can't we just move a few battle groups into the Black Sea? IF we get permission from the Turks to cross the Bosporus, which is no sure thing, we could conceivably do so, BUT, the Russians already have a fleet, complete with ports to repair and resupply at, in the Black Sea. We would have to fight through a blockade of the straights to move a fleet into the Black Sea, and that fleet would have to deal with both the remnants of the Russian Black Sea fleet, and the Russian Air Force which has bases throughout the region.

So what does this mean? It means that military intervention on the part of the US/EU in the Ukraine to maintain its territorial integrity would necessitate a full-scale, medium-intensity war on land, on the sea, and in the air. Is keeping ethnically Russian, and Russian speaking Crimea a part of the Ukraine worth such a war to you? Or are you just interested in blustering and finding new ways to hate Obama?

Long winded cutesy monolog directed at the wrong person. I never wrote the treaty - Clinton and company, so send them your concerns.

What I cannot stand is Obama and his usual lip service, it makes us look more weak and insignificant than had he said nothing at all - we've lost all credibility because every "red line" Obama puts out there is crossed and laughed at.
 
Avatar 57462
 
Yours truly,

Axis
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 1, 2014, 22:48 harlock
 
NewMaxx wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 16:37:
Yosemite Sam wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 16:31:
You telling me if say Guam fell into civil war the USA wouldn't use troops to secure their assets?

Um, you do realize that Guam is a territory of the US while the Ukraine is an independent country, right?

Ukraine is game to you? How bout I take your little board and SMASH!
 
Avatar 57944
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 1, 2014, 21:14 Cutter
 
1badmf wrote on Mar 1, 2014, 19:16:
cutter... no, not going to be baited into this stupidity.

Oh please. You haven't got a leg - historical or moral - to stand on and counter what I said, so don't even pretend.
 
Avatar 25394
 
"Bye weeks? Bronko Nagurski didn't get no bye weeks, and now he's dead… Well, maybe they're a good thing." - Moe
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Saturday Metaverse Mar 1, 2014, 20:58 NewMaxx
 
"Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution."

-Anwar Sadat

Fingerscrossed
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo