Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by aramike

  1. quote: Originally posted by $iLk: I think it proves my points I've been making like 100x over that the GOP has to run on Kerry's remarks. Neither party deserves to win... but one is going to. The fact that the perception is that the GOP has to run on Kerry's remarks proves how flimsy the Democrat platform is. The GOP is only in trouble because they've alienated their base by trying to be more like DEMOCRATS...
  2. quote: Originally posted by Voli0: I'd rather starve and remain uneducated than take up arms and go kill people. I wouldn't be very proud to say that I kill people for money. -v It's amazing that the people who take up arms and "kill people" are the people who fought and died to grant you the rights to spew such rubbish as that unappreciative post. I guess all of human history must have passed you by and not allowed you to understand that the freedoms you CLEARLY take for granted are not there "just because". People fought and killed and died for it. Oh, and they got paid what amounts to a pittance for it.
  3. quote: Originally posted by Wolferz: To get into the military in America you only need to pass the ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery). Passing that test doesn't mean you're intelligent. It only shows that you at least learned the basics in school. Recruiters can and will fudge your score if you fail it.Or let you take it until you do pass it. Due to the fact that recruiters have a quota to meet, and the members of the Professional Liars Club will do anything to meet or surpass that quota. Now, we all know full well that Senator Kerry is a bloody idiot. If I were the chairman of the Democrapic party, I'd kick Mr Kerry out poste haste. First of all, "learning the basics in school" is a decent accomplishment considering the scholastic level of this country, and probably qualifies you as one of the smarter kids out of high school. Secondly, in order to take the ASVAB you need either a high school diploma or GED - which also means you're a tad above a good portion of this nation's students. Finally, just because some idiots can get in, doesn't in ANY WAY that there are a large number of idiot members of our armed forces. Certainly, not enough to qualify Kerry's generalized comments. In case you haven't been paying ANY attention whatsoever, today's military is more of a TECHNICAL field than a "grunt" job. Most of our military members are probably more technically astute than 95% of the rest of the nation... Smart people can pass an easy test too, mind you - oh, and almost ANYONE can learn.
  4. quote: I have no clue what he's apologizing for because he's right.He's not right in any way, shape, or form. You're not "stuck" into going into the military if you do not do well in school (which is what he SAID). In fact, the military probably won't even take you under those circumstances.
  5. quote: I think its easily argued that a war has not been won until your occupation is successful and any uprising has been quelled.Umm, no. You'd have to then change the meaning of the term "war". There are other types of "war" than wars of occupation. quote: You're right, we would win an offensive war within hours of invasion. However, China wouldn't let us succeed in an occupation of North Korea.
  6. quote: 1: Iran and Syria aren't exactly non-threats. Successful terror missions sponsored by both Iran and Syria have already caused serious uprising issues in Iraq. This is all surrounded by a growing problem between the Shiites and the Sunnies.Which is my point exactly. That is precisely how Korea is DIFFERENT from Iraq. quote: 2: Last I checked, over the past few years South Korea has been becoming increasingly supportive of North Korea. They have been IN NO WAY supportive. In fact, BOTH governments STILL actively declare sovereignty over the entire Korean peninsula. South Korea has indeed tried establishing extremely limited economic ties with NK, but that really isn't what I would call "supportive". quote: The US Military is currently exausted with troops in combat in both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as non-combat deployments all over the rest of the world (including South Korea). The fact that guard units are still being called up to go back overseas is more proof of this than one needs.Actually, one needs to know how the military works internally when it comes to deployments. The US military is equipped, theoretically, to fight 2 and 1/2 wars. Iraq is almost one and Afganistan is barely one half. Sending in reservist engineering and support units do not drastically diminish this ability. Furthermore, what do you think those units deployed overseas in non-combat capacities are there for? They aren't sitting on international soil just to sit there - they are there for the purpose of being able to fight if called upon. In fact, those are often our most combat-cabable units. I mean, heavy armor units (tanks, etc) don't have much use anymore in Iraq/Afganistan. So, just because they are deployed in Germany doesn't mean that their capability to project power is diminished. quote: NATO may be able to quickly address this with US troops in the mix, however the US alone does not have the current capacity to deal with the North Korean threat.That statement is manifestly untrue. Would we be able to OCCUPY? Probably not, I would agree. Would the US military be able to win an offensive war, however? No doubt. Whatsoever.
  7. From the article: quote: Another Willett parent, Celeste D'Elia, said her son feels safer because of the rule. "I've witnessed enough near collisions," she said.To think: humanity survived and evolved for 1000s of years before be babied our kids to this extent...
  8. quote: Originally posted by Cmdr. WeeGee: Actually, old El Reg summed it up pretty good. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/16/us..._be_of_service/ Makes sense. As long as we've got troops down there he's got something to cause fear in the populace. Umm, not really... To quote the article: quote: Unfortunately for the Bush/Blair team, Kim Jong-il is the wrong monster very much in the wrong place. Over 140,000 US troops in Iraq still can't secure the little stretch of road between Baghdad Airport and the Green Zone. A military crisis in east Asia, everyone knows, is far beyond any US capacity to address.That is one of the more absurd things I've ever read. Two different scenarios: 1: Rogue nation surrounded by no real, standing threats, therefore forcing the US to perform a far more long term approach in transfer of power, all the while under constant harrassment from nearby enemies. This scenario is Iraq. 2: Rogue nation bordered by US-Allied nation ALREADY in a near state of war against rogue nation, with a large standing army ABLE and WILLING to swoop in and assume any vacuum of power both politically and culturally, with little to no regional fallout. This scenario is Korea.
  9. Funny thing is ... if we turn that country into a molten nuclear pit, the world will be drastically different. So long to the homicidal/despot dictator. Too bad the cost of "world peace" is too high.
  10. aramike

    Ok dudes..

    Voigt-Kampff goes bye bye now too, as he is none other than the recently departed Horseloverfat. Dude, if you're gonna try to sneak back in, good advice would be to not stir shit up...
  11. quote: ÔÇ£I decided today I think I will because it (the questioning) went too far,ÔÇØ she said.I bet you if someone threatened HER life, and that person was questioned but not arrested, etc, she would think that it didn't go far enough. Little selfish twit (to use Jag's word) shows why people her age aren't allowed to vote. The sad irony is, though, that her parents are.
  12. quote: Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: Oh, thats right. Now we're questioning 15yr olds without their parents. Thanks a lot George. We've been doing that well before Bush as it is a federal crime to threaten the president. Besides, what in the heck does Bush have to do with this? I'm fairly certain he probably didn't even know about out as the President of the USA has bigger things to concern himself with.
  13. LOL! quote: In saying that however, the lawless frontier (aka The politics & religion forum section) is in a class all by itself. Its a kind of no man's land and even I tend not to go in there.Heh, yeah so long as it doesn't get outright vulgar and TOO personal, it's all good in that little world...
  14. I've about had enough of this crap. This guy comes here, barely posts ever, and then goes on a multi-post rant at first criticizing the rules and THEN the admins. Let me share with you the PM discussion I've had with Stingray (I normally wouldn't do this but now I'm freakin' PISSED): Stingray: quote: Well, since you asked what I posted, I posted a link to an awesome tech demo (compressed avi video clip) showing a space battle the way we've only seen it on the new Battlestar Galactica show (similar filming techniques were even used). It's most certainly worth posting and checking out. http://sargoth.spymac.com/space_techdemo_HD.rar Maybe I shouldn't have started my post with: "I don't know if this has been posted here before..." Anyway, I'm just saying that this approach to post management is not very user-friendly. It's a bit like you go to a new restaurant and the first thing a manager would do is to piss on your foot. Maybe it's a 3000AD tradition I'm not familiar with. Aramike: quote: Actually its more like going to a restaurant and the manager pointing at a sign implying that you're not in dress code. Our rules are the rules. They've served us well over the years, so we're sticking with them. You didn't say what forum you posted your thread it, though... Stingray: quote: The message was posted in the: "Battlecruiser Online ┬╗ General Discussions ┬╗ PC Gaming & Technology" subforum, in the thread: "Our beloved Space Sim genre. Revival or waste of time?" You know, with rules like that, why let people post at all? Just make it a read-only forum, but then it wouldn't be a forum, would it? Let's just drop it. I don't want to make a fuss here. I'll just return back to lurking... it's worked for me for almost a year. I can live with that. Aramike: quote: Rules like what? The ones that work? Dude, you're not gonna come here, post 4 times and not even been an established member of the community and yet convince me that our rules don't work. They do. Just not for you. That's not good enough, in my eyes, to change them. This guy has posted a sum total of 6 times and at least HALF of his TOTAL POSTS are critical of this community, its rules, or its members. Dude, talk about the game all you want. Visit our General forums and talk about almost whatever you want, all you want. But, for the LOVE OF GOD, STOP talking about how OUR rules don't suit YOU! In case you haven't noticed, most of us were here first. We welcome ANYONE - just not those who somehow think that they're gonna jump in and the community is going to revolve around them. No one here is taking their "job" too seriously. YOU, however, are taking your objection to OUR rules, WAY too seriously. Let it go, and welcome yourself in on OUR terms, or see yourself to the door. [ 10-13-2006, 10:04 AM: Message edited by: aramike ]
  15. Holy CRAP this thread is old... Insurgency FAQ: Q) Is it true that Insurgents get all the chicks? A) Absolutely not. We only get all the wild and hot chicks. The rest go for Galcommies. And the REALLY freaky ones go for Gammulans. Trust me - you don't want a chick after she's dated a Gammulan... Q) Is it true that Insurgents are better than Galcommies? A) Absolutely! Not only do we have more fun, but we have access to all SORTS of banned alcoholic beverages the Galcommies would die for. In fact, I'm drinking one right now that not only gets you nice and drunk, but ist also gtzz yu wellyx sjick
  16. quote: Yeah, I'd like read up on this thread too, because I'd like to add a question to the FAQ of the forum, like: Why do posts disappear for no apparent reason?Posts don't simply disappear without reason. SOMEONE had to have deleted it for some purpose. PM me with what you posted and when, and I'll look into it. quote: I noticed the draconian posting rules a while ago, so I refrained from posting.I wouldn't call them "draconian" as they are fairly simple. All any of us ask are essentially three VERY simple things: 1- Don't post questions that have been discussed ad nauseum on this very forum. Rather, use the search function. Believe me - it works. In fact, keeping the search function streamlined and easy to use is a large part of the reason we try to limit redundant topics. 2- Don't post anything inflammatory. Provacative debate is COMPLETELY WELCOME here, 100%, however. Just keep it clean. 3- Place your remarks in the proper forum. This seems self-explanatory. The bottom line is that, just because we don't tolerate the usual BS here, doesn't mean that we're anywhere NEAR "draconian". Just think before you speak and do a little reading... Besides - don't feel bad; my very FIRST post on this forum (nearly 7 YEARS ago) was deleted. It asked the question, "How do I orbit?" I should've used the search function...
  17. Dang it Derek, I was about to say something similar until I saw the original post date: posted 11-24-2005 08:35 PM. Heh, we both missed this one... Belated congrats Cruis! When we first met, you were but a wee lad. Now you apparently have a wee lad of ye own.
  18. quote: Any outfit with sufficient U235 or Pu can make a bomb.Umm ... dude, that's kinda the hard part...
  19. aramike

    Ok dudes..

    Everyone ... calm down and take a nice, deep breath... OK, first off, if it says "Unregistered" it doesn't mean that you've been banned. It simply means that the User Handle isn't registered aka the profile was deleted. That aside, unless he comes forward with an email address I have no way of telling whether or not he's actually banned from the site. That being said, unless DS or any other admin objects, he stands welcome to return at this point, albeit on a somewhat short rope (someone DID delete his profile, you know...). If anyone has any reason why Nomad SHOULD be banned (and it better be more than "'cause I don't like his opinion"), please send it to me via PM. That should take care of that, I think. Consider that the matter should be closed now, I'm going to do the same to this topic (40+ posts of fluff about this? ). PM me with any concerns or questions. Other admins please feel free to reopen if I've erred, missed something, or you feel the need to add anything else.
  20. aramike

    Ok dudes..

    quote: Originally posted by Wolferz: quote:Originally posted by echo: I'm wicked smaaat! Aye love, That you is. Down boy!
  21. quote: That's interesting, but it would seem to me that a cynical, skeptical and suspiscious mind, moreso than ego, would be the reasons why.I'll stick with ego. Without an enhanced sense of self-importance, skepticism and cynicism isn't likely in cases where the evidence DOES NOT support the theories. Therefore, without any actual proof of their proclamation, the egotist feels said assertion is still solid enough to assert. Why would a logical person do such a thing? Either they want to be known as the "smart ones" who found "it" first should it turn out to be true or, more likely (as most conspiracy theories are not proven), they feel that THEY are on to something that NO ONE ELSE is onto...because... no one else is smart enough to "see" it. I'll believe its the nature of simply a skeptical mind when conspiracy theorists begin to admit when they are proven wrong. More often, they attribute any proof as to their being wrong as a conspiracy in itself. Therefore, they can't POSSIBLY be wrong. That's ego. quote: An election doesn't have to be 'staged' especially with an electoral college, all one needs to do is focus on those few key states that could guarantee victory, play a little dirty politics and roll the dice. Great if they win, if not try, try again. What's so impossible about that?Considering that I was arguing against an election being "staged", that's irrelevent. You can't argue my counterpoint to an election being staged with an argument as to how staging an election isn't really the topic. If you want to debate the electoral college system, however, I'm game in another thread as you're WAY oversimplifying it. quote: It is curious though, how the 2000 election was one of the most hotly contested in history...So? If NASCAR has the closest race in history it doesn't mean there's a conspiracy ... it means simply that they had the closest race in history. Sometime face value is what it is. quote: There is nothing illegal about a group of people getting together to share common ideas and attempt to implement them, it should only be a concern if those people have political power and could control the country and foreign policy. This ain't no group of power brokers planning a real estate deal.So - the only people who should have political power in this nation are people who don't share common ideas and attempt to implement them? HUH? That's absurd. I have a feeling that what you REALLY meant was that people who share common ideas that are DIFFERENT from your own has no place in political power. Thank God that our democracy allows for ideas to be shared. Dude, when you VOTE, you're voting for people to get into power who have ideas that YOU SHARE, hopefully. quote: If the fact that the same men involved in PNAC end up in the highest of government offices, then world events happen to coincide with their publicy stated world views doesn't raise at least *some* suspicion in ones mind then they are either extremely naive or willfully foolish.Or, maybe they aroused SOME suspicion, found that NO EVIDENCE justified that suspicion, and was SMART enough to move on. quote: The term is conspiracy theory, not conspiracy fact. No one has to believe any of it and it doesn't require proof.This statement seemingly contradicts your earlier statement that it would be "foolish" to not be suspicious. A fool would ignore facts, not mere coicidences. Oh, and by the way, the "coincidences" that we would all be foolish to ignore are VERY, VERY thin. In fact, events have to be looked at in a very specific light and WITHOUT regard for certain OTHER facts in order to even call events "coincidences". This is why a somewhat liberally-biased media hasn't picked up on these so-called coincidences. quote: There's more handshaking and nepotism going on than is good for a healthy government, but that's exactly how our government operates.Trust me - you do NOT want to go back and debate which side of the aisle has practiced more nepotism in the White House. It doesn't look good for the left. quote: The idea that this administration is just a cabal of neo-cons who's own ideology failed them, is not outside the realm of possibility with the current state of politics in this country is it?See, that statement in and of itself is flawed because you have to be of the OPINION that the ideology has failed to even BEGIN to look at events in the light needed to create these so-called coincidences. I tend to prefer to look at FACTUAL coincidences that exist DESPITE the light in which I look at them.
  22. aramike

    Ok dudes..

    What is the point of this thread? If someone here was banned unfairly, let me know, I'll research it and if it seems unfair, I'll ask Derek to approve us reinstating said individual's posting rights.
  • Create New...