That's a lot of anti-semitism to ignore-Sun_Tzu-lol yup
Cow4ever's forum posts
HERETIC!!!
"has become"?? has always been!!
[QUOTE="Cow4ever"]Oh. Sorry ok I understand. But clearly alot of games look better than Crysis 2. If we're talking about consoles here. And btw I wasn't serious when I said fact, I don't know why you guys overreact so much with opinion vs facts, doesn't matter. I was just emphasizing my view. mmmwksil
About the other thread that was locked regarding Valve? I know, I was just yankin' your chain, pal. :P
I agree that people here take everything too seriously, which is why I turn everything into some sort of joke after a while. I aim to make SW a better place :D
Lol I agree I try to do the same thing! But somehow it always ends up as a worse place :( lol
[QUOTE="Cow4ever"]
[QUOTE="mmmwksil"]
Don't see any of that hypocrisy here, Cow. Are you possibly mistaken?
mmmwksil
"This is the same guy whom earlier tried to pass off Valve as the greatest developer ever as fact."
So what you're basically saying here is that the matter is subjective.
"I don't know if he's being intentionally funny or terribly serious and wrong."
And here it's suddenly objective.
Hypocrisy at its best.
I was referring to the claim that most games looked better than Crysis 2. This is what the thread was about, isn't it? Perhaps I should've clarified myself, and that was my mistake.
Oh. Sorry ok I understand. But clearly alot of games look better than Crysis 2. If we're talking about consoles here. And btw I wasn't serious when I said fact, I don't know why you guys overreact so much with opinion vs facts, doesn't matter. I was just emphasizing my view.[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Sounds like an appeasement policy to me. sSubZerOo
It would sound like appeasement if the US had no dealings with the Middle East.. But the West for the past 90 years (since really after WW1) has screwed the Middle East in so many ways.. Do people honestly think they burn US flags in the Middle East because they hate us for our freedoms? Or is it because the dictator thats in power tramping down on them was installed/supported by the US.. Or could it be half their family was pasted by bombs dropped by the West in one war or another.. Or could it be that the US still unquestioningly supports one side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a side that continues to go down in a aggressive path of land hostility.. This isn't suggesting some do that, but the fact of the matter is the terrorist don't have to go far to kill some one that is more "free then them".. And I am going to vomit if I ever hear more about American Exceptionalism.. This isn't directed towards you Sun_Tzu.. But how can one be exceptional if one is not the most critical of their OWN actions.. This American Exceptionalism claim seems to be a walking contradiction of it self..
lol "aggressive land hostility". Like giving up 80% of your land for a piece of paper.Well I think that can be discussed but it isn't my point. I'm just saying regardless which country you live in you have to think about the people beyond your border. For example Afghanistan. What I am saying is we should do all it takes to enforce democracy and freedom. And I rather see we try and fail then not try at all. Afghanistan for example the issue isn't solved and lots of people have died. But I still think it was moral, the way they treated women and others are just sick. I know this was in US interest after 9/11 but still I wouldn't want anyone to leave and let the Taliban take power again. But yes I agree western colonialism was a major problem and cause of most of this. Still I don't think it's the same thing. Stopping a genocide with military means for example is different from completely occupy a country, exploit all its resources and make the citizens slave. It's rather the opposite. If anything we should make up for this mistake.[QUOTE="Cow4ever"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] The problem is that the US doesn't always want to help for the sake of the people. They usually want to impose and manipulate to get some benefit. I don't think they have moral authority judging by their actions. And besides many of the problems in Africa stem from many years of european countries meddling there and imposing their western view of civilization. You just can't take a whole culture mostly based on hunter gatherer societies, enslave its people and treat them as inferior and then expect them to become industrialized first world countries and accept what you bring to them as "civilization". The western meddling in the world has caused much much much more harm than good IMO. I'm not even sure it can be stopped now but it would be nice to try.kuraimen
I would support an international force comprised of ALL countries in the world that is there to stop things like genocide but ONLY if it is guaranteed not to be following any political or economical interest by its most powerful members. I don't think the UN applies for that as it is since it is now pretty much a political tool.
All countries?? It's the majority of countries that are dictatorship. It should compromise of western forces. But they're egoistic cowards. UN is the worst criminal here, I can't believe US let them exist on their soil.Yes lol you have moral grounds to be policing the world, yes you have. You should tell people how to live their lives. I'm not saying the result is always great but you should try. You want to let people live their lives? Sure see what happens in Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Congo, Sudan etc etc. Oh women are living as slaves in Saudi Arabia. But don't do anything cause they'll get pissed off and punch you in the face! You know what that is? That's egoism. Like Europe, all they do all day is sitting on their asses and talk about diplomacy and talking blah blah blah. Meanwhile in Congo 4 million people are rape-tortured-murdered. You are afraid people'll dislike you and and punch you in the face. That's egoism. You accept the suffering of others to save yourself. Again I'm not saying the Iraq war is just, but IF you support such policies and then change because of threats you are egoistic and coward! One thing if you speak honest and say it's not worth it or too expensive but don't start with that world police crap. There is no country I rather have as world police. I don't know how the patriot act works cause I am not from USA but if it adds security then it's not bending, it's preparing! Bending is changing all you believe in cause you're afraid of punches and people calling you world police. I never seen bttf[QUOTE="Cow4ever"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] what are you talking about? rons'position is that we have been acting like dicks the world over for decades, it is expensive, we have no moral grounds to be policing the world and telling people to live our way or else, and it pisses people off, if you piss enough people off at some point youre going to get punched. his position is not that 9/11 or terrorism is justified, or that we should bend to fear, hell he is against the patriot act and the TSA as those actions are bending to fear. we are altering our lives because of threats of violence and giving up personal freedoms and dignity. i dont know where you got your information but you might want to check the horses mouth if you want it to be reliable.
our current role in international politics is that of Biff from back to the future.
TheWalrusBeast
Your argument would make sense if the US has actually been so kind to do something other than talk if its not in its interest. In the few countries you listed, the US has frankly done nothing positive and if anything, actually detrimental
Rwanda - massacres and war crimes of unimaginable scale and US never intervened or even sent any peacekeepers
Saudi Arabia - One of America's best allies even though they just stopped a popular coup in Bahrain and the Saudi kingdom is still a theocracy that bars women from driving and stones them for dating
Iran - Theocratic with a crazy leader but the US obviously can't do anything and hasn't done anything. In fact, its the US that caused this regime's rise because of the support of the dictatorial Shah in the 1970s who the Iranians toppled.
Congo- Again US never intervened and did little besides criticisms from the state department
Sudan - similar to that of Congo and Rwanda, US never intervened, did absolutely nothing while people were getting massacred during its civil war
Ron Paul really has a point. If the US is really the fair and moral superpower, it would have done things not in its interest to protect people but it only does things in its interest and historically has always been short-sighted in its policies (i.e. supporting Taliban against the Russians, bringing up Saddam against the Iranians, attacking Iraq thinking it would be a quick win, etc). Thus, its policies like these and hypocrisy that brings so much hate to America.
Well I agree. But they should, that's my point regardless of what others think.Well I think that can be discussed but it isn't my point. I'm just saying regardless which country you live in you have to think about the people beyond your border. For example Afghanistan. What I am saying is we should do all it takes to enforce democracy and freedom. And I rather see we try and fail then not try at all. Afghanistan for example the issue isn't solved and lots of people have died. But I still think it was moral, the way they treated women and others are just sick. I know this was in US interest after 9/11 but still I wouldn't want anyone to leave and let the Taliban take power again. But yes I agree western colonialism was a major problem and cause of most of this. Still I don't think it's the same thing. Stopping a genocide with military means for example is different from completely occupy a country, exploit all its resources and make the citizens slave. It's rather the opposite. If anything we should make up for this mistake. there is no way an outsider can fix internal issues, there is no way for outsiders to change cultural norms, and it is doing just those things that got america to where it is on the world stage. all of the good intentions in the world amount to nothing good if only death and more political instability comes from it. how many governments need to be overthrown and countries tossed into turmoil with leaders worse than what they had placed into power by us does it take before the lesson is learned. yes world peace is a nice thought, but you cant force it on people with guns and bombs.... I'm not talking about world peace. I rather have war and freedom than peace and oppression. Saudi is at peace atm as far as I know and it's crap anyway. And take Rwanda for example. If US had intervened alot of people would have died and USA would've been called world police etc etc but the fact is there is still 1 million(-US caused casualties) that would've been saved. Look at Afghanistan. Yes it's full of death but what would've happened without the involvement? Women would have their fingers cut of for wearing nail polish. But actually the long term effect is that women now actually can go to school. It came at a great cost but IMO the cost would've been even bigger if the Taliban was still ruling.[QUOTE="Cow4ever"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] The problem is that the US doesn't always want to help for the sake of the people. They usually want to impose and manipulate to get some benefit. I don't think they have moral authority judging by their actions. And besides many of the problems in Africa stem from many years of european countries meddling there and imposing their western view of civilization. You just can't take a whole culture mostly based on hunter gatherer societies, enslave its people and treat them as inferior and then expect them to become industrialized first world countries and accept what you bring to them as "civilization". The western meddling in the world has caused much much much more harm than good IMO. I'm not even sure it can be stopped now but it would be nice to try.surrealnumber5
I know and it makes you ahypocrite cause you critizise me for stating my opinion as fact and then do the exact same thing.[QUOTE="Cow4ever"][QUOTE="mmmwksil"]
You know I was talking about you, Cow4ever. I just quoted DL instead.
mmmwksil
Don't see any of that hypocrisy here, Cow. Are you possibly mistaken?
"This is the same guy whom earlier tried to pass off Valve as the greatest developer ever as fact."
So what you're basically saying here is that the matter is subjective.
"I don't know if he's being intentionally funny or terribly serious and wrong."
And here it's suddenly objective.
Hypocrisy at its best.
Log in to comment