213374U

Tekken owns SC. Hey, you said rants on other games' inferiority, not superiority. "

Sure. But metal still gets rusted there. They still use cables, chips, and that sort of stuff. The kind of stuff that melts with prolongued use. The kind of stuff that can't survive severe temperature changes, you know, that kind of stuff. 47 got seriously wasted in a five year lapse. But yeah, I guess it could easily last for 4,000. Honestly, I don't really care what kind of garbage they add to an already crappy game that I don't even own. But it's still a stupid idea, and I'm calling it.

It was the lesser of two evils. Carpet bombings, artillery bombings, famine and the rest of side effects of a continued land campaign would have killed many more, both Japanese and North American. I don't advocate murdering civilians, but that was war. A war they started, mind you. And what did they achieve? What were their successes? What was their effect? International projection? My point exactly. If you are trying to say that the Soviet Union was inefficient at managing internal dissidence (which if left unchecked may lead to armed resistance), perhaps it is you who needs to do some research. Non sequitur. Nobody has raped and killed anyone's family here, not politically, not literally. If anyone, it's been the palestinian suicide bombers. That kind of twisted logic and maliciously presented straw men may work to confuse some people, but you are going to have to do better with me.

Um... O: b00bs (also: language filter) U: Legs

There are no militant dissident groups in Denmark, to speak of. Care to post any other blatant non sequitur? Fair enough. But you are conveniently disregarding the fact that the Japanese were damn well entrenched and a land invasion of Japan to force their surrender would have arguably taken a much higher toll in human lives. It was war remember? No, it's not kind of self-defeating. As I said, it worked in the Soviet Union. But again, I don't advocate the murder of innocent civilians. Sending terrorists (and perhaps their families) to concentration camps is a different story entirely. Read above. Let's put it simply. My lawn is private property. But if you trespass into my lawn, and I shoot you dead, I am a criminal, regardless of my reasons for shooting you. That's why I don't care about their reasons, and I'm not even willing to listen to them until they stop it. I'm not against negotiating. In fact, I'm all for it. But I wouldn't be willing to do it until they stopped harboring and encouraging terrorists.

Umm... I think I might have something for you, then. "

Well, logic is useful when you are trying to make sense. If what you mean is that you don't care whether or not you make sense, then fair enough.

No, not really. As "better" and "worse" are both human concepts. And without humans to apply them, their value is lost. And that in of itself would be sublime. The same reasoning applies to any subjective evaluation of the situation. Your logic fails to deliver, once again.

Nice try. You are talking about Russia, I was talking about the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union there was virtually no terrorism. Nobody wants to see their family end in a gulag in Siberia, no matter how miserable their lives are. Oh, right. How polite of you. In the end it is nothing but accepting conditions imposed by means of murdering civilians. Call it what you will, but that's what it is. Wait, now it's my turn to be polite. It's not oppression. It's called "security". No. There is only black and white. It all comes down to accepting the demands of murderers or not. Simple as that. And force alone hasn't worked because we aren't really using force. Don't be mistaking the particular brand of "peacemaking" that the US military is exercising in Iraq with force, because it's not the same thing. This is all the proof I need. Unlike you, I don't care about their reasons. I don't tolerate murdering civilians, under any circumstances. You, on the other hand, seem to establish degrees of tolerance depending on their reasons. Yes, it must be truly great to have such an infallible universal moral compass that helps you to establish when is it fair for people to get murdered and when it isn't. You would be funny, if we weren't talking about innocent people getting murdered. Oh, wait. They are not so innocent, are they? Right. They were oppressing the Palestinians.

No, not really. As "better" and "worse" are both human concepts. And without humans to apply them, their value is lost. OH NOES! FOILED AGAIN!

Huh? How does being an ass about everything yield better results? At best it forces companies to close. Oh, wait. I'm talking with the guy that wants the entire world to shut down. My mistake. Really now, wouldn't you be happier telling a psychologist about all of this? At least he wouldn't flame you about it. Oh, wait. A psychologist would charge you. My mistake. My, am I sloppy today.

Another "DUH" argument from the naysayer par excellence. Yes, Hades, we could do that. But then again, that logic applies to some 95% of everything. So, yes, Hades. We could all be like you. But the thing is, we'd rather not. )

No, you can't.

Oh, right. So it's better to give in to the demands of terrorists. After all, that's what we have done in this case, isn't it? Yes, that is apparently the only way to defeat it. If it encourages terrorism to pop up elsewhere well, we'll give in too, right? And yes, it worked. It worked in the Soviet Union. Twenty to sixty million deaths, but it worked. No, you don't understand it. You justify it. That's the problem. "Hey, they are unemployed, and their lives suck. What are they going to do?" How does trying to live in peace sound? That's what the jews have done for... well... always, and it looks like it's worked for them. Murdering civilians out of spite is never understandable, let alone condonable. Sorry buddy, but you have no idea what you are talking about. When it comes to terrorism, there is only black and white. And it's attitudes like your own that allow terrorist movements to live on. So, whatever.

That's what you get when you support terrorists or fail to do everything in your hand to foil them. Ah, excellent. Another "terrorism is very bad but I can understand it and they deserve it" discourse. Authority: Language.

I bought it. It was worth it, if only to get the HD pack. Uh, you don't want to ask that. :ph34r:

Then I suspect you've never played one. Would I be engaged in this discussion if I didn't know what the hell am I talking about? I don't know about you, but I don't usually do that. )

Sure it can. Can it fix itself though? Can it fix itself after being blown to bits? Right.

Woah, how have these boards survived without your witty (and still ever so informative) comments? You try to keep your PC running for the next 4000 years and then tell me. Not to mention that your PC doesn't get shot at regularly (I hope).

Huh? How is God giving Gaza to the jews similar in any way to France, Spain, and England conquering America?

Man, what is Authority going to say when he sees you spamming this thread? :D

Obviously you haven't had much luck with your PnP gaming groups. That sort of people just aren't role playing, so it it's not an RPG. There are lots of games that involve rolling dice, but they aren't called RPGs. Which basically boils down to "it can be done, but in practice, it's unfeasible". Exactly what I meant. And there's a very significant difference with standard tabletop games. In a MMORPG, you can't prevent some dumb fuck from outside your group to crash your nice RP session (if you ever manage to arrange such a thing). In a closed PnP group, that simply cannot happen.

:ph34r:

On a side note, that's an excellent statistics page.

Heh. Justifying nasty stuff "in the name of peace" is not a very solid way of supporting your opinion, as the proponents of the opposite thesis can do it too, with the same ease.