Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Prometheus98876

Regulars
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1340

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Prometheus98876

  1. Prometheus98876
    Yeah, but if you see any Goa'ulds, please feel free to kill them for us! Welcome by the way.
  2. Prometheus98876
    What possibly good reason is there to place it in 2016, when it is meant to be a "timeless" peice according to Ayn Rand? I guess the movie is not obligated to stick to this, but why change it? Seems it is better not to. By setting in 2016 it seems it would lose some of the important "hey, this stuff could happen to at any stage in history [ any point in time in which trains as in the book were possible anyway], not just in 2016". Though in all fairness, the reasonably intelligent viewer should be able to make this connection anyway. Still, not everyone is going to do this..
  3. Prometheus98876
    There is no way to make answering the second question optional or something? Heh, no a big deal, but I did not consider that I had to answer it and got an error the first time around. As I expected, a decent portion in the 80-85 category. I certainly know a hell of a lot of active people around this range and the 85-90 range. Shouldnt be surprising that young adults in these categories will dominate this poll ( obvioulsy it is not a sure thing though).
  4. Prometheus98876

    I have more respect for the Mafia than the Occupy [Places] movement. The Mafia do not pretend to be champions of virtue and humanity in quite such a deceptive and offensive way. When they fuck you over, they are honest about it, they admit to fucking you over. They dont pretend to be doing it to save mankind. Given they are not spreading around a virulent ideological plague, they are also about a billion times less destructive.

    1. Thor

      Thor

      Agreed. Though of course I do not agree with the workings of organized crime, I do see where you're coming from. Your statement also applies to most politicians insofar as I am concerned. They, too, can be much worse than the mob.

      I believe the national debt has now reached fifteen trillion dollars?

      But the politicians can't be the only ones to blame for all this. We can also blame the apathetic American citizens who do not understand how their government i...

    2. mdegges

      mdegges

      Have you guys seen this? http://www.breitbart.tv/meet-former-soviet-citizen-who-confronted-occupy-wall-street-socialists/#.TsKlQBjlScO.blogger

  5. Prometheus98876
    Unless of course you do not go to the movies primarily to see [ often OTT ] action scenes and CGI and instead want to see a good story in conjuction with a plot that does not make your eyes roll. With actors that actually play the character in a beleivable fashion , without making it harder to accept whats going on. These preferences describes me and probably a lot of other people reading this thread, for what it is worth. If I want good action scenes and CGI, I will go play a video game. Im not paying between 12-20 ($NZ) to see some [ I grant probably amazing looking] CGI wizardry kind of tied together by bad writing / acting that pisses me off. If I go to the movies, I want a good story, preferably something reasonably well executed ( that does not constantly make me irrirated) with a theme I can agree with. But I will settle with something well executed. Something that is not just robots punching each other , with something about something thrown in at the last minute so it seems the movie is about something ( I am alluding to T1, which I have no seen in ages and I have not really seen T3), but something which is not really well integrated into the movie. Though why you would go to see a movie like Transformers 3 if that was the case, eludes me. However, I have not seen T3, so maybe it is a lot more than CGI and action scenes? I seriously doubt that though...I would almost be willing to say that based solely on the fact it is a Micheal Bay movie.
  6. Prometheus98876

    Wow, that was a a fairly unique experience. I went to the cinema and was not rolling my eyes half of the time. I guess not *all* movies made are totally stupid.

  7. Prometheus98876

    If there are wolves outside howling and trying to get inside : You do not wait till they eat your family before acting, you kill the wolves. When wolves growl and show you their fangs, you do not stand there and try pass it off as "harmless posturing" or deny that they mean to kill you. You kill the wolves. The Middle East is fill of States that are wolves that wish to devour the Western world.

  8. Prometheus98876

    I think at this point, it is so far beyond obvious that Iran want to set up a "Nuke All Infidels Button", that it is ridicollus to deny it. Any honest and informed person with a brain should see it. If you do not see it : You are not sufficently informed or maybe you do not have a brain.

  9. Prometheus98876

    Anyone out there that still doubts Iran would love to be able to build nukes if possible and would then use them to *initiate* a conflict : You really need to wake up. Same for those that do not think that those in power in Iran largely agree with their figure-head President. Of course they do, they are Islamic zealots. What do you expect? Those that would flinch at starting a war in the Middle East : Wake up. The alternative is allowing the Middle East to continue the war they already star...

  10. Prometheus98876
    For that matter, how do you know that any argument we give you is valid? Maybe you have not perceived how it isnt, so nothing we could say could be assumed to be true? Whooops, Dreamweaver already kind of asked this. Oh well!
  11. Prometheus98876
    You think that they are not mad, but just the scapegoat of the non Western world? Umm..what? I have not read everything in this thread since I last posted, so maybe this has been covered : What you clear to explain that rather absurd assertion?
  12. Prometheus98876
    For sure : Something has to be done in any case. Even if they do not get nukes. Of course, this was the point I was making. It can ( and should be done), but has not worked because nobody has done what I ( and the book I mentioned) say needs to be done.
  13. Prometheus98876
    No, I admitted it would not help as much to curb other sorts of terrorism. But that it would help eliminate state-sponsoered terrorism.
  14. Prometheus98876
    *rolls eyes*. You seem to entirely miss the point, I am talking aboug STATE-SPONSOERED TERRORISM, NOT ALL ACTS OF TERROISM. In which case we obviously want to stop them doing that ( amongst all the other things they want to do , like invade Isreal, nuke places etc ). That is the context I am talking about. Stop evading / trying to change the context or I will not continue to argue this with you. Read the damn book, if you have : Read it again and think until you understand. Else this is a futile debate.
  15. Prometheus98876
    Of course it often falls back to WW2, it is one of the BEST wars which can be used to provide evidence for the thesis of the book. Sorry, warfare has not changed such that t he lessons of the book become invalid when appliede to modern warfare. If you think that, then you dont understand the nature of warfare, its root causes, how to morally and properly end a war and did/do not understand the book. I never said warfare of any sort "curbs terrorism". However I did say that waging war against *state-sponsored* terrorism would if done properly, be an effective way to eventually stop this happening. Obviously terrorism is not completely stopped, but at least states would not be knowingly funding it anymore.
  16. Prometheus98876
    Yes. Evidence that supports the claim that is how you end *state-sponsored* terrorism. Read "Nothing Less Than Victory" by John David Lewis ( there are other books that help with this, cannot remember the names off the top of my head, I think one is "Winning the Unwinnable War " by [ I forget the name]). http://www.amazon.co...e/dp/0691135185 What I am talking about here is how to wage a war which has the long-term effect of removing the will of the people of a nation ( this includes the leadership by t he way ) to engage in such actions. You know, like what was done to Germany at the end of WW2. Different situation I know, but I see every reason why the principles discussed in the book would apply here. The book talks about in the context of starting wars etc, but if you read the book you can easily see how this applies here too. If anyone has failed to make such nations do this in the past, I bet its because they did not do it properly. As detailed in the book.
  17. Prometheus98876
    Of course terrorism cannot be stopped that way. State sponsorship of terrorism can however be stopped by oblierating the ability of any State that does so attempts to do so. Invade, destroy any infrastructure required to do this and generally wreck unlimited havoc , until that State realizes that if they do not stop this, they will not only fail, they will die. But of course the prospect of death will not stop all of them. The prospect of the utter destruction of their nation / political structure might. If it doesnt? Oh well, they will be too dead to do much. Rinse and repeat until there are no such States left and until nobody dares try set up another one.
  18. Prometheus98876
    That is why in your hypothetical situation, it might be about oil. I wanted evidence for why in reality this *is* largely about oil. And no, it is not withing reasonable doubt that the Iraqi invasion was about oil. The fact that the Iranians worry about protecting their oil is certainly not a reason to think this. Even though if Iran is invaded, the invaders might decide to take advantage of the oil resources there anyway. But that will not a primary motvating factor behind the conflict. / invasion.
  19. Prometheus98876
    I am not ignoiring the "geopolitical' situaton. I simply want us to confine ourselves to Iran or facts clearly relevant to Iran and whether or not it is a [potential] nuclear threat. Pakistan really has nothing / little to do with it. Care to prove the speculation about oil or to provide a reason to think oil has much to do with it? If you know I am not my country, then how does what my country thinks in this regard have anything to do with this discussion? Beyond the fact that we are unlikely to want to be of much help, even if NZ was able to (though we have one of the best SAS forces in the world apparently, and this could potentially be a big help).
  20. Prometheus98876
    Ok sure, Saudi Arabi is another country that I might consider to be a [potential] threat as well. However we are not talking about Saudi Arabi and other Middle Eastern nations that might need to be taken out , we are talking about Iran. So what if "my country" takes that attitude? I am not my country nor do I generally agree with the political decisions the leaders of my country makds. Nor does my country being in the position it is , prevent me from taking a rational stand on what America ( or other countries for that matter) should do in response to the threat Iran poses.
  21. Prometheus98876
    Another case of the argument by false analogy fallacy rearing its head. Iran is not Pakistan, nor is very comparable in this context. I have already stated that I believe it to be illogical to assume that these mullahs etc are NOT picking a president that for the most part accurately reflects upon their fundamental political views and aspirations. In any case, do you feel like taking the risk ? Why should we? I also think it is evasive/ignorant to try claim that Iran is not a threat to the US ( it is already one in the sense that it apparently funds terrorist acts against America and helps some of these attacks to be possible ) or that it could and would not become one if nobody stops it. Of course, nobody said anything about sacriciing "Kiwi" blood to stop Iran. NZ has no army of sufficent strength to try such a thing and it knows that. The best NZ could do is to involve some of its SAS ( special forces ) troops in some sort of military strike/campaign. Which is arguably a reasonable step if Iran is a credible threat to New Zealands allies. Why on Earth would we think this?
  22. Prometheus98876
    We do know that they have a nuclear research body do we not and that they are trying to do *something* with nuclear technology. Should we take our chances with these madmen and wait till the evidence is *not* flimsy before we take out their insane leaders and become damn sure that they are never able to pursue the production of and use of nuclear weapons?
  23. Prometheus98876
    You think Steves (and my theory too if it would seem ) is LESS likely? Why is that? But in any case, at least we are in agreement as to what must be done. Even if the reasons for thinking that may not be entirely the same.
  24. Prometheus98876
    This is one reason why I said it is reasonable to assume that they are going to pick someone that agrees with them for this role. At least in terms of religous and political fundamentals. Fat chance they are going to pick someone that doesnt agree with them. And if they did, I guess we would hear about more dissent between their President and their wishes? Or maybe not, I dont know. I just think the logical conclusion is that whoever *is* in power is accurately represented by the lunatic we hear from all the time.
  25. Prometheus98876
    Ok, that is true, he is only nominally the leader and the other guys opinions are not as entirely clear. But I think that it is pretty reasonable to assume that they are fundementally in agreement here. Given the chances to do some of the stuff the "President" claims to want to do , I think that they will be pretty happy to go along with it. Why should we take the risk , assuming it is a credible threat and we can do anything about it though? I think someone would be insane to take that risk in that context. Hell, I would not trust the stragetic issues ( like the anti-nuke shields ) to do much to stop them trying. Certainly if they were to bomb say ..Isreal or other allies of America.
×
×
  • Create New...