RPGmasterBoo

A large part of why it's related to criminal offenses is because it is already criminal. There was a large spike in crime rate when alcohol was made illegal too. Do you suggest that making drugs legal would not result in more drug related offences, in the long term - as the number of addicts increases?

Just to clarify: are you one of those permanently "depressed" people? I dunno. Are you one of those permanently annoying people? Yes. I was hoping for a more definite answer. See if you weren't one of those people, and you were in fact genuinely depressed I'd have a good reason to give you a wedgie. So don't keep me in suspense.

Because using drugs in most cases and in most times falls squarely into the illegal territory, like rape and murder. Drugs aren't illegal out of someone's lack of appreciation for hedonism but because they make people who can't handle them (and most people can't after a while) into useless zombies, unlike tobacco and alcohol which, while bad - don't prevent people from working, except in extreme cases. Also its proven that drug use is related to criminal offenses of all sorts and legalizing drugs would obviously lead to a spike in crime rate. What happens when a junkie can't afford to buy drugs at the local medicine shop? He'll rob someone to get it, no? So that changes nothing. And if you give them out for free, I don't know how you're really going to justify me paying some else's drug habits with my hard earned money. I'd rather pay the police to put them behind bars you know. And what are you going to get, if you make drugs legal and perscription based? A society of useless drones, who spend half of their lives high?

Its nothing more than common sense really.

Let's not.

Just to clarify: are you one of those permanently "depressed" people?

We should also legalize murder and rape because we can't prevent them. No sense in all those murderers and rapists having to clutter our legal system and jails, when we could just tax them per deed...

Amusing. And completely irrelevant to the functioning of an army. Yet another case of retarded civilian policies making their way into the military.

Maybe because he's the head of a mafia like pyramid and without him the US pet project of independent Kosovo would collapse. Also because the NY based Albanian mafia is extremely wealthy through heroin trade (which goes from Afghanistan, through Kosovo to the west) and has basically been bribing every official of note since the Clinton administration. The Hague has made no effort to truly prosecute anybody of note from the Albanian side. One isn't likely to put ones allies on trial in ones own court. The US really needs to make lobbying illegal. The "foreign policy for sale" thing ain't doing it any good.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/1...like-mafia-boss

Same old, same old huh?

Broken record topic alert.

O.o

Same as in the last 50 years...

The disappointing thing about DA2 is how it looks considering the amount of money pumped into it. Otherwise its not particularly better or worse than most other RPG's. If the Witcher 1 and 2 can look damn good and be made by a small company there is no excuse for BW not to hire some quality artists.

If you dont like this you're a muppet

Too many on topic posts.

Nice realpolitik. Only I see they are leading this economy war. Of course they do keep their state reserves in dollars, so symbiosis and integration with the US was their intention from the start. Makes the idea of conflict troublesome to say the least.

I just have a strange sense of funny I guess. Lady, from what I see you're playing a post apocalyptic doll house.

Even heaven looks like crap in FNV.

@Crimson You have issues.

I used to be pretty darn good at this stuff. I thought I was getting a handle on how it all works.. and poof. I find I haven't a freaking clue and my heads exploding. I think it might be time to take a big step back from thinking about this stuff and go have a cup of tea to ensure the day is survived. No one can keep up with those things after a while. The pace of new developments outstrips the learning ability of the (aging) human mind at some point.

Your honesty is refreshing. It wasn't that they were the middle class, most of them were dregs of our political system. It was the funds liberally sent from the west, that gave them a position of power and influence. Around these parts "human rights activists" is synonymous with ideological workers on US/EU payroll. In friendly countries their task is to increase their patrons influence. In unfriendly ones, its really pure subversion. I live in Serbia now, formerly Yugoslavia. You may wonder where this confident attitude comes from. Its because Serbia is a very small country where "everyone knows everyone else", and very few things can stay hidden or obscured for long. Change for whom? Change for you perhaps, it is doubtful if China would now, or ever - have any benefit of becoming democratic. I doubt very much that the major public opinion in China is one of a need for radical change. After all, China is living proof of an incredibly successful market economy under an "authoritarian" government - something that was considered impossible a few decades ago. There is no imperative for change at the moment. Besides, even if they do change, they wont become a semi-colony like Japan unless by military defeat or a sudden collapse of the entire political system. The Chinese leadership doesn't appear so silly. They introduce changes at a snail's pace, carefully, without experimentation. Which is why I think the US and EU are at best on a standstill with China - at worst a slowly losing side. China's current policy isn't likely to change without a major conflict.

I agree with you that China's political system should be authoritative, it's a cultural and historical fact that they do better under strong leadership. The US and allied power is threatened by China; as they are by anything different from their views ever since the Cold War. The problem with Communism is that is an expansionist government and an anti-capitalist movement, their main goal is to spread communism to the corners of the globe and "liberate" all the oppressed laborers under the capitalist yoke. It is therefore something to be threatened by even if the Chinese are only Communist in name and have a free enterprising society like our own. As with any rising tensions and forthcoming conflict in our history; the press is the first to demonize the enemy and push for a conflict. As usual we wait until they deliver the first strike and unleash all of our fury (history repeating itself :sigh: ) Even though the fact remains that a woman was arrested for tweeting because it's considered political dissent. As someone who has experienced a Communist regime first hand I'll tell you that this is the sort of bull that tends to run the most. They watch you, they tell you what to think, and they'll bury you if you speak against them and call it "political dissent". I would not be surprised if we found out that they are committing more atrocities inside these camps; it may not be reason enough to go to war but it's enough to pressure them into change. Its a good observation that the Chinese are communist only in name. Kissinger noticed this a long time ago during his visits to China (when he was busy making anti soviet deals with Chinese leadership). You're wrong in thinking that communism is the threat here. China hasn't for a long time used any of the tactics that led the former SSSR to the grave (such as inspiring and financing revolutions worldwide). In fact it has abandoned communist internationalism, in favor of economical dominance. That is the real threat from the US/EU perspective, the fact that time is working in favor of the Chinese in every respect (in regards to the economy). The US is so dependent on China, that it cannot but feel threatened. Yes, she was arrested for political dissent. On the other hand, if you've been in a formerly communist country that went through one of the various soft revolutions, you'll know what human rights activists are often about. In my country "human rights activists" were the people who somehow had money to smoke Marlboro and drink whiskey when the rest of us were standing in kilometers long lines for flour, milk and a drop of gasoline.

Aww *kicks Raithe*