~Di

So you're just going to ignore all that, yank out one word... Dresdan... and go back to trying to hang a horror label on it. *sigh* Makes my point, sadly, about people hearing only what they want to hear and ignoring everythingelse. I don't know who got jail time for Dresdan. Ask Churchill. He ordered it. Then go find out who got jail time for the Rape of Nanking.

Did your professor also mention that this power the emperor wished to maintain was power over the Japanese military, and a refusal to bow to the direction or wishes of the conquering army? That's kinda like saying, okay we'll stop playing now, but you go away and let me rebuild my army; then we'll talk. Now I'm not a military person, but the conquered are not usually allowed to dictate terms of surrender in which they maintain their own military power and refuse to accept the authority of those who have conquered them. That is spelled "insurgency". That would have required either a full-scale invasion, or going back to war in another year when they'd rebuilt their military capacity. Either way, nasty stuff. You see, when people are educated only from a single perspective, in-context reality is the first casualty. Too many professors, I fear, have dosed history with their own bias. There are lots of books out there that will insist Truman and Churchill were just so damned evil that despite the poor little emperor screaming, "I give up, don't hurt me" they decided to wipe out a few hundred thousand people for poopies and giggles. Worst part is how many people are willing to believe that without a question. Edit: Some 'Light' Reading on the Subject This trestise, The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II: A Collection of Primary Sources from the National Security Archives probably contains the most complete information available, based upon source documents of the day rather than the opinions of those who, shall we say, have a bit of a disagreement with decisions that were made in that era. A quick perusal shows that everyone will find something to support their own pet theories; however, they'll have to plow through stuff that supports other people's theories to get there. In other words, both sides of a very complex issue. Enjoy.

Above emphasis mine, of course, but frankly that is entirely my point. Over the years I've seen dozens of WW2 discussions and nearly all of them seek to shift blame around by ignoring the reality of what really happened in the context of those times and what really led up to WW2 (which some say was inevitable after the deliberate humiliation of a defeated Germany following WW1)... and to shift that blame to the scapegoat de jour, all these concocted speculations and conspiracy theories are created, then repeated ad nauseam until some people actually begin to believe them. The reality is that the USA, exhausted and broke from helping European allies during the first WW only to see Europe fall into chaos yet again, had become the isolationist nation in those days that most people say they wish the USA was today... although back then the USA was rounded excoriated by Europe for not leaping back into the fray immediately. The reality is that FDR did not want to see Hitler's plans come to fruition, and secretly sent arms and supplies to our European allies. The reality also includes Japan, which had already embarked on a brutal invasion of Asia, including China and Korea, to which the USA had expressed extreme umbrage by imposing various sanctions that displeased the Japanese almost as much as their brutal invasion displeased the Chinese. The reality is that Japan and the USA were handling their dispute through diplomatic means (supposedly) and were in the process of negotiating a peace agreement, which turned out to be a deliberate distraction as Japan planned its sneak attack, hoping to destroy enough of our fleet that we would be crippled long enough for them to solidify their foothold in the South Pacific. It makes me utterly nuts to hear people solemnly discuss ways to transfer responsibility for Pearl Harbor by either insisting that the USA economic sanctions and embargos against Japan were really the first act of war, so nobody can blame the poor Japanese for the sneak attack, or pretending that FDR was the bad guy because he knew what the Japanese were planning and let it happen for his own vile purpose. Sheer, unadultrated bovine excrement. I'm old enough to have spoken with people who lived through WW2, people from both the USA and several countries in Europe. They would be aghast at this revisionist history and fabricated blamemongering. Any out-of-context fact can be manipulated to make black appear white, and white appear to be purple. That is exactly what goes on during so many of these discussions, pounding on facts which support the position one wants supported while totally ignoring any facts which do not support that position. Pretty soon, facts become so muddled with speculation that reality isn't even an issue anymore. People begin to believe what they want to believe, and what it's comfortable to believe. Ah. My point exactly. The A-bomb was not dropped as a show of power, although I know that's a popular theory. No one who ascribes to this theory has ever, to my knowledge, offered a shred of evidence to support that. To the contrary, the evidence, as in documents and transcripts of the day, show that the A-bomb was dropped to avoid an invasion of Japan which estimates indicated would have cost over 1 million lives. Whether Truman should have made that decision or not, in hindsight, is debateable. However, your understanding of the surrender negotiations is at best... lacking. It's not my job to educate you, but I strongly suggest if you are interested that you Google up both sides of the issue. You may also want to Google up the Dresden thing, since you are determined to ignore the fact that it was Germany that started carpet bombing of London and other UK cities... and that the entire Dresden operation was Churchill's baby, not the USA's. But golly gee, once a face has been picked for fashionable demonization, so much easier to stick with it. At this point I'm not sure what you were taught in school. America is no different than any other country, in that it has done good things and bad things in its history. Some people attempt to declare the USA as different for various reasons, not the least of which is to validate a global double standard. I am NOT justifying the USA's current-day operations, btw. However, hating what the USA is currently involved in does not justify rewriting history by mistatement of fact. If you feel the USA is the bad guy today, and many do, fine. That doesn't mean that history should be revised to make the USA out to be the bad guy then, too. I'm not WW2 expert and am the first to admit that. But it really is depressing to see the reality of history... the good, the bad, and the ugly... distorted with half-facts, no facts, and blatant conspiratorial speculation until reality dissolves into a half-baked caricature of the bad, the vile, and the really evil. I initially made a sarcastic comment to avoid boring y'all with the bloated and boring trestise above. Obviously brevity is simply beyond my ability. Or maybe the devil made me do it. My apologies. :D

Yes, yes, the devil made him do it.

No.

Wow. The enormous variance in how the history of World War 2 is taught in different countries is... enlightening, to say the least. Here I thought Hiro and Hitler were the bad guys. Little did I realize that it was really that evil FDR and Truman conspiring to take over the world. So I guess this thread is officially not about the United 93 movie any more, but I'll still respond to the original topic. I don't know if the movie is inspirational or not, because I do not plan to see it. I didn't know anyone on that particular flight, but I did know people in the WTC and frankly the sickness in my gut from that day is something I honestly do not want to relive.

Wow. On another forum, we got a lecture on how we stole half the country from Mexico. Now we're getting a lecture about how we stole Alaska from Canada. Who knew? LOL. I maen, didn't the world just emerge from the cosmos with country-lines already drawn up, neat and tidy? It's not like Europeans fought each other, invaded each other's territory and redrew boundaries over the centuries... ... oh, wait... Always interesting to see how various countries educate their own to differing versions of history. (Yes, yes, ours included.) As for annexing Canada... no. Thanks anyway. P.S. I'd sure like to know which six states have a Hispanic majority population. I think the US census bureau needs to know that too, lol... BTW, Hispanic is not included with Caucasian on the official census documents. They are quite separate, as are Asian, Native American, South Pacific, etc., etc., etc.

Okay, then you are talking about a PS:T/BG2/IWD-type situation where one could roll different characters and replay to get a different experience. Great. IF... and it's a big 'if'... the game is worth replaying in the first place. However, those games I have consistently replayed and enjoyed in the past were all considerably longer than 20 hours. Considerably. They had lots of places to explore, lots of things to do, lots of content to peruse. A 20-hour game will have half to a quarter of what these games had in the way of content, obviously. As I've said, I am obviously not Obsidian's target audience because I do not include mods, toolsets, multi-player and forced replay in my calculation of whether a game is worth my money or not. A game that can be played in two days is not worth my $50. Sorry. It's just not. You may plunk down your $50 with my blessing, however.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are asking. Your post doesn't make any sense to me... :"> Perhaps I simply haven't had enough coffee this morning.

That isn't my point, which I apparently didn't make clear. PS:T did not withhold content from me until my second play-through, as Dungeon Siege 2 did. In DS 2, your party could only have 3 members on the first run-through, 4 members on the second, and 5 members on the third. On one other game I played (cannot recall the name), there was actual content... new areas to explore and new items made available... on the second and third run-through. This is, to me, player manipulation of the most annoying type, forcing players to play the game repeatedly not because they loved the game (as you noted, I played PS:T repeatedly, as I did BG/BG2 and IWD), but because the have to replay it to see all the content to which they are entitled as a buyer. There's a big difference, in my opinion. A very big difference.

Yes, it would be bad. Dungeon Siege II tried that manipulation tactic. In DSII, players had access to more party members on the second and third play-through. Royally ticked me off. I paid my money... I don't want to be forced to trudge through the same game 2-3 times to get all the content I've paid for. If I choose to play a game more than once it's because I enjoyed the game enough to do so, not because the developer withheld content from me in an attempt to force me to do so. That tactic always annoys hell out of me, and makes me cross the developers who pull it off my future 'buy' list.

Exactly so. Grommy is quite correct. As I've said, 20 hours is my line in the sand, the place where the $50 price tag overwhelms the entertainment value for me personally. Fair enough, I am not Obsidian's target market; I'm not a mod-maker, a mod-user or a multi-play afficionado, so my expectation of gaming value may be different than someone else's. Still, it is my expectation and I simply will not purchase games than demonstrably do not meet it. That's not a boycott; that's my choice as a consumer. Oh, and I don't believe it's appropriate at all to compare a 10-hour fighting/car race/sports game that is meant to be replayed dozens of times with a CRPG, which at most may be place a couple of times to try out different characters. Day and night, gaming-wise. We're not talking about how many pages it takes to tell the story; we're talking about how extensive and complex a story we should expect for $50. You might spend the same money to purchase a 3-page brochure as you would to purchase a 300-page hard cover novel, but I would not. Heh, I'm dating myself but I remember when folks were up in arms about a game of "only" 60 hours, when we were using BG's 100+ hours as the gold standard. At that point if we'd warned that games would be released with 20 hours or less of content for the same $50 price tag, folks would have ridiculed us mercilessly. And yet, here we are. As for Feargus, I like him. I've never found him to be pompous or exhibit any sense that he's "too good" to chat with the masses. I agree it would be nice if he clarified this issue, but frankly that would be a lose-lose proposition for him IF the 20-hour estimate is correct. So I don't expect to hear from him, and I won't think less of him because of his silence on this matter. If this is the wave of the future for CRPG's, shorter and shorter games for the same amount of money, then I'll simply presume this part of my hobby life is over, and I shall move on.

No more so than deliberately misinterpreting a generalized statement in order to personally criticize someone you dislike.

Even if you had read all 30+, you still wouldn't have a good idea of how long NWN2's campaign is going to be. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This is true. However, when Feargus says the game is going to be 20 hours, then I have a tendency to believe the game is going to be 20 hours.

Boycott? I just said that developers had reached my personal economic limit. I'm not going to pay $50 for a 20-hour game, because the product is no longer worth the cost... for me. If y'all want to buy it, do so. If you want to pay $50 for a game that can be completed in 30 minutes, knock yourselves out. It seems apparent to me that Obsidian is counting on people paying this exhorbitant (in my opinion) cost-per-hour figure in order to have the basis for a modding community that they are counting on to do what they have not done, give the fans significant play time for their investment. Probably not totally Oblivian's fault; development costs, distribution edicts all play a part. That doesn't mean I'm going to support a product that I believe counting upon my love of the genre to prey upon my wallet and rip me off. If, upon release, NWN2 is found to offer substantially more gaming experience than it currently appears to, I'll reconsider. As of now, however, it has been crossed off my list.

I read the first half dozen pages... didn't see anything I haven't seen before in these discussions about games getting shorter and shorter. Initially these discussions were about games dropping to 40 hours. Comments were split between fanboi "That's great, I don't want no stinking 60-100 hour game anyway" and "What? They expect $50 for a 40-hour game??" Now we got the same fanboi-types going "That's great, I don't want no 30-40 hour game anyway" and the rest saying "What? They expect $50 for a 20-hour game?" Well, I'm in the "other" category. I'm not going to spend $50 for a 20-hour game. Period. And to the developers who smugly figure I will simply because it's that or nothing... you lose. It's nothing. Crap. Next year we'll be seeing developers bragging about a game that took 5 years to develop but delivers TEN WHOLE HOURS of gaming goodness, and the same bloody fanbois screaming, "That's great! I don't want no stinking 20-hour game anyway." This is ridiculous. [/annoyed rant]

A guy was driving along, leaving his friend an answering machine message when he suddenly witnessed an accident involving 4 little old ladies. A radio station got hold of the tape, and played it on the air. It is the funniest thing I have ever heard! Here is the link Even if you have slow dial-up, like I do, wait for the 3-4 minute download. It is flat worth it!

Yay! Just... yay.

*cries* I so wanted that game. But everyone is right, Torn died with Black Isle. *cries more*

Hmm. Interesting. So when y'all grab the biggest piece of pie... or even horde the entire pie to yourself... this is a good thing? When you take what pleases you without considering the needs of others, this is a good thing? Well. Makes me glad my time on this planet is almost up.

Welcome home. And I mean that sincerely. I hope the American dream lives up to your expectation. I think I can say with some certainty that a fine young man like yourself will most certainly live up to ours. May you and your descendents for generations to come achieve all that you hope for. I hope this country is as good to you and I suspect you will be to it.

Oh crap. Hard to maintain a proper snit with a sincere, heartfelt and genuine apology like that. Okay, okay. It's all good.

You see, back in China, we call this 'taking off your pants and fart'. Why can't we tighten our border security and prevent more illegals from entering and grant those already here legal status (not citizenship) to work here? Or maybe offer them the choice of paying a hefty fine for breaking the laws in the first place so they could stay or be deported? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The fact that you can make this statement and ask these questions after everything I have written in response to you convinces me that you have either not bothered to read a thing I have written, or are so blinded by your own position that you refuse to acknowledge anyone else's. I have already answered those questions. I see no reason for repeating myself. No foreign national has a right to be in this country unless they abide by our laws and conditions of entry, just as I have no right to be in any country except under the conditions they have set forth. I honestly do not understand why they... and you... feel that you are entitled to be here just because you want to be, and our laws be damned. This is the attitude of entitlement that has soured a hell of a lot of my countrymen on the immigration issue. And it's fast souring me as well. I have tried to have an honest discussion with you on this topic, and point out how the immense flood of illegals has adversely affected our own population. However, I won't continue to respond to you since you either cannot understand what I am saying or simply refuse to acknowledge it, prefering instead to rudely liken my responses to 'farting.' Good day to you, sir.

Yep. Yep. It didn't work when Reagan did it in 1986 and it won't work now. Let me quote from an AP article in my local paper this morning: " Mexican citizens anticipate passage of guest worker plan... at a shelter overflowing with migrants... the shelter's manager said he has not seen such a rush of migrants since 1986, whent he United States allowed 2.6 million illegal residents to get American citizenship.... " And there, in a nutshell, you have it. (I found a CNN link to the article ) Yes, these people are brave and deserving of a better life. So are about 5 billion other poverty-ridden people on this planet, and frankly the 290 million taxpayers in the USA cannot be expected to support all of them. No foreign nationals have an entitlement to enter this country at will and break our laws in doing so. They just don't. "My plan" involves enforcing our present laws. So you could more accurately phrase that as "Though there are still a few problems with enforcing the current laws": I did not separate their family. They did. I don't know whether the US would lift quotas once the flood of illegals is under control or not. As for getting back the same people we just deported, fine with me, so long as this time they follow our laws.

Uh... I'm afraid I don't see what the point of that comment is to the topic at hand. I'm not impressed that illegals pay sales taxes, which even tourists pay for heaven sake and which cannot be avoided. I'm also not impressed that payroll taxes are deducted from paychecks garnered using illegal social security numbers, for all the reasons I've previously discussed. No, it isn't true. You can say that it's true until hell freezes, but that doesn't make it so. The more accurate representation is that illegal immigrants do jobs for a wage that Americans won't accept, but in most cases it's less than a living wage for people who actually have to survive in this country's economy rather than ship money home to a place where exchange rates turn it into a small fortune. The facts are that Americans and legal immigrants were indeed doing those very jobs before illegals moved in and agreed to do them for less money and without benefits. That is the truth, and it's a truth I have seen with my own eyes for more years than many here have been on the planet. It does not, however, count anyone who has been unemployed long enough to drop off the unemployment rolls. Nor does it count anyone who is on welfare. Nor does it count those legal non-citizen workers who have had their jobs taken by illegal workers. If you spoke to a large number of folks who have played by our laws, received the proper documents to be in this country and work in this country legally, I think you'd see that they too resent the illegals who flood over the borders disrespecting our laws and our country. If you read what I've already written, you know why this is so. I did not say I was against any sort of guest-worker program. We already have many such guest-worker-type programs already in place, where foreign nationals can come here and work legally. We've had this for decades. The flood of illegal workers has displaced many of them. Reagan's amnesty didn't work in the 1980's, so repeating a proven loser again isn't going to work either. My plan? I've already stated it: Enforce our laws. All of them. Maintain our border security, no matter what the hell it takes. Actively deport illegals, actively prosecute employers who knowingly use illegals, and free up jobs for former welfare recipients and legal non-citizen workers at the legal wage requirements. If costs go up because a corrupted employer underpaid and exploited illegals, then costs go up. We'll deal. Believe me, the foreign guest workers already in this country will thank us a thousand fold. Basing a false economy on exploitative illegal wages, then whining when caught should NOT be rewarded despite the scare tactics of the law-breaking employers who want to continue breaking laws to maximize profit. Smuggling, either people or product, across a border in violation of our laws should NOT be rewarded despite the scare tactics that our economy will collapse without illegals who have no respect for our laws. Creating feel-good laws that will never be enforced because of political reasons should NOT be rewarded despite the scare tactics of a corrupt government trying to blackmail USA taxpayers into continuing massive money influx to support their country, while another corrupt goverment is willing to bow to said extortion in a bid for blatant vote-mongering and corporate campaign contributions. There are no heroes in this sad situation... except for the legal workers who came here, work permit or green card in hand, respecting our laws for a piece of the American dream and saw it fall to ashes when they were replaced by those who showed those same laws nothing but contempt. Too bad nobody speaks for them in this pathetic mess.