Walsingham

I just noticed the bit at the end about THQ. I thought THQ were shod-merchants? Viz: Firewarrior.

I disagree with almost all your points. Hurrah for me! Seriously though, leaving aside your objection to always playing not German (try finding a game where you can play Britain in an FPS), I would suggest you try (EDIT) Brothers in Arms; Road to Hill 30. Three things make this awesome... four things make this an awesome game... FIVE things: 1. The soldiers swear properly. 2. The Germans don't look evil. They look young and aggressive, but not actually evil. It would of course be better if they looked really really tired. 3. Guns suppress the enemy. Which means when bullets are going off around you, or someone pops round a corner and lets off a machine gun, the target's nerves get rattled. He is disinclined to expose himself to fire at long range, and becomes a worse shot at close range. This leads to realistic fire team tactics, with flanking and room clearance. My particular favourite is the way that, when under fire, your best option is to send off a few clips in the most likely direction even if you can't see anyone, and only then run for cover. 4. Accuracy is a function of two things. First you have aiming accuracy, which is represented by your sights wobbling around with your breathing. This becomes more extreme when you get hurt or have been tearing around. This can be mitigated by good mouse control. Then you have natural ballistic error, which is just gravy. Hitting someone at long range is a hell of a lot more satisfying. 5. Difficulty changes the enemy AI more than it does their health. At low levels, as soon as you open fire the enemy scatter to cover and fire stolidly back. At higher levels they become more... proactive. The first time I upped the difficulty I was merrily trolling through a level, and had scampered up to a wall behind which some Germans were sheltering. I let off a magazine of tommy gun fire over their heads to keep their heads down and reached for my tea. You can imagine what happened to the tea when a stielhandgranat lofted over the wall and landed at my feet! At higher levels the devious bastards will suppress you as you attack, then, if you are exposing anyone try to work up your flank! This is even more unnerving, but very exhilarating. SIXTH and final grooviness: 6. Controlling friendly forces is done by holding down the right mouse button and pointing at stuff. If you are point at ground then the selected fire team will go there. If you are pointing at the enemy your fire team will try to suppress them. Simple, intuitive, and effective. ~~ Buy this game. Then help me make a mod for the British at Arnhem.

My google search tells me a viper 5 is a cricket bat. Huzzah for cricket bat based attacks!

Something like that. *Tries to shuffle in front of suitcase full of cocaine, and stunned grizzly bear*

See, this is where other Christians need to step in and set the matter straight. Christians themselves need to make it clear that we will not abide such behavior. It needs to be clear to every Christian who uses violence as a tactic that the person who reports you, the person who arrests you, the judge in the trial, and the jury of your peers are likely all going to be Christian and yet you will be punished for breaking the law. One of my biggest concerns regarding the response to the Mohammad cartoons was the response from the Muslim community at large to the acts of violence. The Muslims speaking unconditionally condemning the violence were too few while the majority reacted with either tepid condemnation or even tacit agreement. Christians must uphold the law, even if it requires the use of force on other Christians. Now, in some cases the law is wrong. In some cases, Christians would be obliged to break the law and even fight back against injustice, but I doubt offensive candy qualifies in either case. Insofaras I have any right to judge, being at best a very poor sort of Christian, I agree. It is disgusting and contemptible that any faith should issue death threats, but it is nothing short of obscene to do so in the name of Jesus. It's like Jews expressing annoyance by eating mounds of bacon. On Saturday.

Jehovah's Witnesses: "Hello, we'd like to talk to you about _JE_sus!" Bernard: "Really? How is he now, come on in!" Actually, it's mainly sorting all my damned receipts. I hate doing it. There shoud be some kind of terrible oath you can swear and then they just take your word for how much you've had to pay out. If you are found to have exagerrated too much then they sand your legs down to stumps with kitchen towel.

Don't they have a right to be offended? I agree that they should turn the other cheek, but as long as they are protesting peacefully what is the problem? Death threats are not very "Christian" however What death threats? There were none, just alot of complaining. Good grief and learn to read. I believe our colleague was assuming that for anyone to draw the analogy there would have had to have been death threats.

I spent most of the day desperately avoiding my taxes. Which, if you have seen the TV show Black Books, can inspire the strangest things.

I think it makes a very effective propaganda tool. It tells me Jesus is sweet and delicious, if fattening in large quantities. And I might also add that if male genitals are offensive in religious art someone had better tell the Pope. As for the most offensive thing to ever happen to Christianity... that man should be obliged to sit down and view most of mainstream culture. Like in A Clockwork Orange. And finally, sense of humour? Sense of humour? I get irascible if someone tells me I can't drink for a week. Try the rest of your life!

Some women do seem to enjoy setting little tests of loyalty. But then, you might think I left my pants all over the kitchen as a test of loyalty.

Sometimes I am so proud of this forum I want to cry. No, wait, that's not pride...

Here's a thought: why not have a mini computer in the sword that shows you what you have using LEDs? Or a mail shirt that counts hits?

I was just about to do you down for fliting with female drunk hobos, until I realised that this puts you beyond me in terms of female contact this week.

No, you're taking too narrow a concept of how that wellbeing arises. Things like keeping the global economy on an even keel, ensuring fareign hostile powers don't become a military threat, global diseases like AIDS. These things don't stop to wipe their feet at the line the taxes start getting paid. US predominance has come about precsiely because as the UK started doing what you advocate the US stepped up to assume the reins.

In true forum style I'm now going to diss your favourite band. The Berlin philharmonic kicks the London one off a high balcony into a shallow swimming pool.

A truly clever dicatatoprship would encourage its citizens to read Wikipedia, so they experience the unsettling chaos and ridiculousness.

By "stretched my ear" do you mean putting in one of those earrings that requires a big hole and will hang open when not wearing one? I do indeed, I put a 6mm thick earring in it. Going to go up to about 10mm. It's not all that bad, if you take it out then your ear heals up and returns to normal so it's not like I'll be stuck with a giant hole in my ear forever. I'm no expert, but that sounds rather implausible. Hope for your sake it's true.

As long as it's not your pet what do you care?

It isn't simple. It's arbitrary. You won a war way back you got those states. If you want to go to brass tacks you should abnegate all responsibility west of Connecticut. Hell, why not give up on the Americas entirely and come back to Blighty? Basically I'm saying you can't take a utilitarian view and say nuts to the rest of the World, and you can't take a moral view and say nuts to the rest of the World. If this isn't true help me out and explain how. Because frankly it sounds like your objective function is heroic levels of apathy.

A good day for dieting, and for sorting my taxes. Also established salad recipe: Grated carrot salmon boiled egg pickled walnuts mustard and vinegar dressing fresh black pepper

You're being desperately naive about who you owe the money to. You're too old to be taking this kind of grade school approach to serious issues. And even if you aren't I know you're far too smart to be so simplistic. Tell me you honestly think the World is as simple as you're saying. Irrespective, why on Earth are you so hot for your 'own' people. Why give a damn about some folks in South Carolina? or Hawaii? Hell, the Uk is probably closer. Does that mean we should expect handouts? I don't believe in no borders, but are you saying that your responsibilities begin and end with whatever nonsense the international comunity has agreed are the borders in 2007? Take the Uk for example. Certainly we have well established national boundaries, but we have long standing and perfectly sensible ties to Australia, Canada, Nigeria, and other commonwealth countries.

You can't call a female dog seamus. That's my brother's name.

Firstly, if you think your economy would be as strong as it is if you weren't 'intruding' all the time in other countries you're bananas. This is the real world and not to sound all gung-ho but it does play hard ball. You build alliances, you trade favours, you threaten, and sometimes you intervene. To use a comedy quote: "Fran: Do you know that in Tibet when they want something they give something away? Bernard: Do they? That must be why they're such a dominant global power. " I'm not saying you couldn't be more equitable and a bit less power crazed. But if you abandoned the aproach entirely the world would be dominated by someone else who used it. And as for Katrina I think it's been well established that the problem was firstly Washington treating Lousiana in precisely the way you advocate -"Use your own damn money and stop expecting handouts". And secondly a total failure of emergency planning and management. Neither of which was for a lack of available funds due to Iraq.

Simple curry: bird eye chillis, turmeric, plenty of fresh ginger, some mango if you can get any, and cumin seed. Use fish if you can. Grated carrot, and a dab or two of molasses sugar/molasses. Clean you right out.

Right there with you. Isn't that what has happened anyway with the overly-aggressive intervention in Iraq? The US had broad support and/or acceptance for its attack on Afghanistan, which it had squandered by the time it invaded Iraq. The US promised it wouldn't let Afghanistan degenerate into a tribal mess, yet for many places it did so. Some of us who opposed the Iraq war did so because the US has form. A fine point, if I may say so. Although I should observe that the principle failure in AF has been a lack of humanitarian funds, rather than an absence of military personnel. Something which ALL nations are guilty of not just the USA. Made all the more uninitelligible when the amounts missing are so small - barely 600 million. If that aid had been extant we would now be well on the way to seeing a stable AF rather than seeing it turning nasty again. However, a measured and sensible intervention strategy is not what our esteemed colleague is arguing in favour of. My understanding is that he is arguing for an entirely partial strategy more akin to that of a crotchety old man in a woodland cabin than the most powerful nation on Earth. As for turning friends away I should disagree after much reflection. Certainly it has alienated certain countries, like Germany, France, and Russia. But I have reached the conclusion that they were never true friends in the first place. France showed its anti-US fervour at every opportunity in the commercial and military sectors. Russia has Vladimir Putin. While Germany seems intent on cementing an Eastern European bloc in direct competition with the US. Conversely, events since 2001 have shown Americaa developing a new clique of friends more willing to back it up. Poland, Malaysia, Thailand, South Korea being some of them. ~~ As for the missing marines and sailors my thoughts are with them etc etc. However, war is a terrible thing and I would prefer the govt to continue jawing for a while yet before we start throwing bombs at people. This strikes me as pure brinksmanship by Iran looking for chips to play so that Britain wil quit backing anti-nuclear sanctions. Something which might not have happened had Russia not expressed opposition to the notion of serious sanctions being used.