Walsingham

Obsidian Entertainment Lovable Loser - Got dumped by the cool girl while you were both in high school. Tends to stumble over his own feet. Has taken the fall for other's mistakes in the past. Doesn't have a lot of money and winds up taking odd jobs to make ends meet. But he's fun to hang around with because he tells the best stories. LOL Bang on!

Good on you, fellah. How much do I have to pledge to nominate a game you have to play (technology permitting)?

Amy Acker's one of those women who is best in motion, not in still photos. Like Gillian Anderson.

I once had a boring dream. Tried to shoot my way out. Couldn't find a gun. Nightmare. Literally. Had another boring dream. Found a discarded plastic carrier bag. Sat on it. Lifted both handles at once. Took off. Flew outta there. Went to some pyramids, had a chat with goblins. Found out they're unionised. Turned out OK as a dream.

I'm afraid that it is _precisely_ because the anthro-warming model is so extreme that ONLY measures like enforced de-industrialisation would do any good. That can't/won't/shouldn't happen. So whatever is coming is coming.

WHERE IS THE OBSIDI-FRIEND?

I just bought this. On your recommendation.

Well, my position is that the real problem is not people who don't believe in warming. The problem's people who do believe in anthro-warming, and seem to be living in fantasy world where the solution is wind power, or wearing hemp sandals. I don't support pro-Green policies because they're confused, and pointless. If the problem is as serious as they say then they amount to launching surfboards off the boat deck of the Titanic. To be painfully clear: i don't object to the problem. I object to the solution.

Sorry if I'm being thick, but presumably themed live gaming would be more valuable? If we're going to organise something.

By this standard even the Soviet Union was a democracy because on some levels it worked that way too. But when push comes to shove it doesn't and neither does a military as a whole. I'm unsure if you're missing the point deliberately. Democractic nations have almost no appetite for taking casualties. It's arguably because democracies place a higher value on human life than non-democracies. If you can't take casualties them you either have to pick fight with people who can't fight back, or come up with another way to fight.

I am afraid that Iraq faces a choice between ethnic cleansing beard-nazis and the 21st century. I only hope they make the right decision. Because while I don't think the situation is hopeless, I do think that only the Iraqis themselves can fight this new phase of the war.

You really do have some fascinating notions about terrorism. Terrorism isn't apolitical position, it's a military tactic, like cavalry charges. Anyone can use it. Terrorism, that is the application of weak military force against undefended targets, is nothing more or less than a tactic used by those _with weak military forces_. For some reason I've never understood this has become moulinexed in popular culture to denote plucky underdogs. But an _alternative_ way to have weak military forces is to possess limited political appeal, be incapable of offering any meaningful state apparatus, and lack any better ideas. In short you can be a terrorist because you're a plucky hero, but you can also be one if you're just a c***.

Can we settle this question about the far right in the Ukrainian government ranks once and for all? My understanding is that yes, they have been turning up, including a number of foreign fighters. But given the recent election gave them less of a showing than the far right in France, is it REALLY sensible to describe Kiev as Neo-nazis? I'd just like to know how you're calculating that view.

Interesting, but I've seen ideas like these my whole life. And they were around before this. Ultimately, the real defining feature of the city of tomorrow is the humans of yesterday.

Ah. Seems a bit weird. Because it's the anti-Ukraine masked fethwit - oby - who has been wetting himself over deaths here. Supporting the elected government of Ukraine seems logically against armed militias hardly seems pro-death.

Carpet bombing a friendly nation <graunching noise of mental gears> is obviously a bad thing. But I genuinely don't understand why we aren't drone schwacking every fuel lorry in the rebel areas. It would stop the bastards selling oil and generating funds. And would presumably massively complicate their supply and movement.

WTF are you talking about?

Because you don't live in AMERICA. You are so right. *sobs*

There are no democratic armed forces. You don't need to explain to me what drones are for. But AI is just not there yet and if your comms fail and you have no humans to do the job you're screwed. If you're trying to make a joke about democracy within an armed unit, then you don't know about: - How mercenaries work - How the SAS (publicly say they) work

Of course there's a need for it. The marines do opposed beach landings _by definition_. Replacing the command position with an armoured turret is one option. A far more sensible one would be a an armoured sensor periscope, and a remote turret. But these aren't nearly as hard to get right as the mobility of something which has to travel over everything except clean air. Hence the trials are showing the bloody thing will move.

Really? The fact that I have no weirdness or even sexytime in my dreams is making me question my own sanity. I've helped three people with this 'problem'. They all dream now, grand, rolling, ****ed up dreams. Be careful what you wish for. If you really do want to dream, keep a book by the bed, and a pen. You need to write down anything you can remember, even just how you feel, as soon as you wake up. Keep doing this. You will remember your dreams eventually in full colour.

Communication line and/or AI will always be a glaring vulnerability for any drone. Unless they invent Skynet. The glaring 'weakness' in any democratic armed force is the risk of casualties. Hence drones.

I had one beer after work, and still feel p***ed. I'm not sure if I'm really lucky, or dying.

What Russia vetoes is you helping them in Syria. Touche.

On one side you have poeple living in luxury (after taking every good pice of land with resources). They have to live with the horror of knowing that maybe, one day, one crappy, home-made rocket may fall somewhere near their house (if it ever gets that far). How many people have actually been killed by those rockets? You have a higher chance to be struck by lightning! On other hands you have people that are oppressed, systematicly (periodically) bombed into stone age and fear of getting shot/killed/bulldozed and bombed every day. If I was israeli and lived in Israel, I wouldn't worry much. If I lived in Gaza, I'd want to burn Israel down too. And I'm saying this as someone who experienced war and knows how it feels to be in a city under siege. All this BS "justification" Israel provides is just that that - a metric ton of crap that doesn't hold water. There is NO justification EVER for walzing into another country and blowing apart civilian structures (civilians included) and infrastructure. No justification ever? Use wild exaggeration much? Allowing for the fact that you're obviously generalising for some weird rhetorical impact, you're still talking rubbish. Israel should just allow rocket attacks on its territory because their population have TVs and fridge-freezers? If my government allowed my town to get rocketed at random I'd vote the ****ers out. I don't care if it was Palestinians, martians, or rotarians!