Georgia

[tombom]

I'm kind of interested in what was bad about it. I do notice some uncited stuff that's pretty offensive.

[PicassoCT]

Forboding Angle, one Man against a world gone Mad and taken over by a leftist Conspiracy.And to fight this evil, he decided to join the Conspiracys worst version- undercover- and entered the Spring Mapping Section. After all they produce Stuff for free (Communism), have State Interventions (Board-Moderation) and are, worst of all from strange countrys like Sveden, here definatly lies the rotten evil heart, the Throne Room of the WorldConquerors... and there hidden secret weapon...

(This is a Openended Conspiracytale- you may continue the Quest for the ugly Truth)

PS:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservati was 404 by the evil leftist conspiracy. They taken everything, even our Gramar, but they left us our pride, the Ability to provoke.. and a little lulz

[manored]

Reading this thread has been interesting, but now it is getting rather... strange :)

[Forboding Angel]

I agree Manored...

@picasso, that was the lack of me using the url tags. The page was conservatism in the united states wikipedia article.

One man? I doubt it



The red states are all the ones that didn't vote for John kerry in 2004

And FYI US conservatives are very critical of conspiracy theories in general.

Fixed link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservati ... ted_States (This article is laced with random US liberal bullshit here and there, but at least it should help you grasp the concept)

Keep in mind that I'm not trying to convert people, but damn, you kids have some weird ideas about conservatives. And no, US conservatives are nothing like the liberals in europe, and are apparently quite the opposite of conservatives in europe. For people who claim to know so much about US politics, you should know this already...

[tombom]

I know perfectly well about American politics. Please explain how they are different.

[Imperium]

One thing that I've noticed in this topic is that there appear to be many people that oppose Forb yet I can't recall a post that actually supports him. I might be just remembering incorrectly of course, I've been reading in small doses. Just seems strange that no one else seems to believe the same thing as Forb on this forum.

[Forboding Angel]

Well apparently you truly don't.

And ungh, that wiki article is laced with so much bullshit.

THis section in particular just baffles me...

Right-Wing Authoritarianism

Everything written in that section goes against conservative beliefs/ideals.

That article really needs to be torched and re-written because it is just wrong. Forget I even mentioned it. Good lord.

@imperium, Most conservatives generally tend to ignore stuff like this, because it's just simply not worth getting into, I however like debate (to some extent), and imo you can learn a lot about people by getting them to say what they actually feel. Platitudes and faked neutrality go a long ways towards hiding one's true beliefs.

Additionally, I don't like bullshit. And I especially don't like bullshit that gets passed as fact when it clearly isn't when one has researched the subject.

The annoying part of it is when people switch to attacking me instead of actually addressing anything I said, even worse is when I rebutt someone who actually addressed what I had to say and they resort to attacks instead of rebutting.

Debate works like this. Opinion, rebuttal, rebuttal (rinse and repeat as necessary), random viewer weights the arguments and forms an opinion. Unfortunately, many of the people here do not understand the principle and reasons for having rational debates.

Edit: Decimator will occasionally throw an oar in, and so will fang... (rather vehemently coming form fang generally, but that doesn't mean what he says is crap. In many cases it's very well thought out)

Deci is a fellow conservative, and a much better debater than I tbh (you might even say that he is a master-debator... har har ).

Fang iirc is a social conservative for the most part, and I believe a fiscal conservative, but kinda jumps the boar to moderate and liberal in some areas. A wild card if you will

Edit2: Probably the most interesting portion of topics such as these is the fact that in many cases people derive that I am an intolerant ahole with little or no patience. The reason it interests me is because I in most cases have the patience of an elephant (however, I do have my moments, just like everyone), and I'm probably one of the nicest people you would ever meet. Words as we know do not convey tone written very well. Short helpful answers appear as snide and condecending, etc. It's actually kind of a damn shame. TBH if you are one of those people, maybe you should talk to some of the people that know me on a personal basis around here.

And above all, please understand this. Just because I don't agree with you, doesn't mean that I don't like you. For example, as many of you well know, aegis irritates the living hell out of me. However, in reality, he is a nice guy, and regardless of what you may believe. I don't hold grudges against him.

[[Krogoth86]]

Can a mod plz cut off all that general political "bla bla" from everything that focuses on Georgia & other actual happenings?

[tombom]

One thing that I've noticed in this topic is that there appear to be many people that oppose Forb yet I can't recall a post that actually supports him. I might be just remembering incorrectly of course, I've been reading in small doses. Just seems strange that no one else seems to believe the same thing as Forb on this forum.

I know Decimator, at least, has the same point of view.

Forboding Angel, I just don't think going "lol inflate tyres? more like messiah lol" is a very good way of conducting a debate.

[Forboding Angel]

Obama is quickly becoming a religion here How is that not funny?

[Snipawolf]

I support forb, deci, and fang, I think...

I just don't post much any more.

[Decimator]

I generally don't get involved in discussions of the meaning of conservatism. Last time we did that it got so convoluted that it was pointless.

I'll simply list my point of view:

-Individual freedom is to be desired. The entire purpose of the state is to ensure this.

-In order to maintain individual freedom, a government is required.

-Governments have the tendency to reduce freedom, which makes them more a necessary evil than a good, and therefore the government should be kept as small as possible.

-A strong military is required to defend individual freedoms from foreign powers.

-governmental power should be located at as local a level as possible; certain things do require a large scope like border protection and the military.

-Individuals must be able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, as well as against domestic criminals. Therefore they must be allowed to arm themselves with powerful weapons.

-The less the government siphons from the economy, the better the economy performs, which increases the quality of life for the individual by increasing their supply of money.

[manored]

Obama is quickly becoming a religion here How is that not funny?

Thats nothing, here in Brazil people stampede to workship windows that suffered a weird quimic reaction that formed a silhuete that reminds a saint...

[Felix the Cat]

I generally don't get involved in discussions of the meaning of conservatism. Last time we did that it got so convoluted that it was pointless.

I'll simply list my point of view:

-Individual freedom is to be desired. The entire purpose of the state is to ensure this.

-In order to maintain individual freedom, a government is required.

-Governments have the tendency to reduce freedom, which makes them more a necessary evil than a good, and therefore the government should be kept as small as possible.

-A strong military is required to defend individual freedoms from foreign powers.

-governmental power should be located at as local a level as possible; certain things do require a large scope like border protection and the military.

-Individuals must be able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, as well as against domestic criminals. Therefore they must be allowed to arm themselves with powerful weapons.

-The less the government siphons from the economy, the better the economy performs, which increases the quality of life for the individual by increasing their supply of money.

So we have ourselves a Goldwater conservative here!

Thing is, conservatism in the US is split. I'd fall into the "traditional conservative" camp, somewhere near Deci - but conservatism today doesn't represent my views at all.

Here are the main conservative blocs:
Traditional conservatives/Goldwater-Reagan Republicans - generally consists of businessmen, executives, managers, finance-industry types, and "Big Business" in general. Essentially favors Deci's views, with extra emphasis on lowering taxes, removing trade barriers, lessening regulations on business, etc. They aren't too concerned with social issues, but may chime in against affirmative action from time to time. Unlike in some other countries, US business are split on the merits of protectionism, but the majority seem to favor free trade.

Christian/Evangelical conservatives - generally consists of middle and lower class fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians. In the past, these were the Populists. Social issues are very important, and these types are generally the most vocal supporters of "tradition" and "family values" and the like. The "God Squad", in short. Favors protectionism and pro-labor policies, in line with its blue-collar roots.

Neo-conservatives - a small but vocal bloc, mostly concerned with foreign policy issues. This is (or was) the conservative "thinkers" group, drawing most of its support from conservative think tanks, colleges, intellectuals, and the military brass. They support an aggressive foreign policy with a "strike first" doctrine against potential foreign threats, and advocate forcefully promoting democracy and free trade across the world. Strongly favors free trade and opposes protectionism.

So there's three different conservative camps, all with differing objectives. This is causing increasing tension in the Republican Party, as some strongly favor policies that others strongly oppose. For example, the traditional business conservatives are generally in favor of stem-cell research, cloning research, and other cutting-edge bio-medical research policies, while the Christian conservatives are generally opposed to it. This is one of the areas where we could see an "unholy alliance" of two groups that have in the past opposed each other - Christian conservatives and Green liberals are both against this sort of "ethically questionable" research, as well as generally against genetically modified foods and the like, while traditional business conservatives and liberal humanists are generally both for it.

[[Krogoth86]]

BTW - here an interview that most certainly went the wrong way and was pretty much stalled when it was obvious which way it's going...

You'll see two eyewitnesses telling how they were attacked by Georgians and "rescued" by Russia. It also becomes pretty obvious that Georgia started the attacks (on civilians)...

CLICK FOR VIDEO

Another "interesting" thing is from this interview with Mrs. Rice where after an imo valid question the "connection" suddenly fails...

CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO

I think it really is strange that when comparing 9/11 and the recent events everyone is trying so hard to make Russia look bad. I mean the number of dead is quite comparable and it seems you can call it a fact that Georgia started all this. So why is it bad when Russia strikes back "a bit" but not when the US invades two countries (with one having nothing to do with 9/11 and pretty stupid "justifications" apart from that) killing millions?

Not that I think it's good if Russia really has broken the cease fire but I fail to see as to why all this one-sided goofing on Russia is happening...

[manored]

Countries always put their enemies in the position of devil before their people. My bet would be that since Russia is in the oposite side of the country with the greatest influence in the world it is losing the propaganda war :)

[Panda]

PS @ Panda: Overlord is a great Game i agree, but i just imagine what those Goblins would do with the Sheeps... they would end up as Weapons of Massdestruction like in Worms..

Killer sheep (I'm joking. I saw a strange, but amusing movie about that in which the sheep were being experimented on.).

Worms sounds like a fun game!

I admit the Sheepcomparison was a stupd explanation, but i tried to cut it down to the essentials and remain neutral and realistic. And i wouldn´t have remained neutral if it would have been Cats&Dogs ore Hamsters&Lolcats, or donkeys&Elephants..

Just don't compare them to Galapagos turtles or marine iguanas. Those animals don't have a fight or flight responses because they do not feel threatened, but I'm not sure exactly where thanatosis (can be explained by the expression: "playing possum") or tonic immobility (an adaptive, paralysis reflex reaction) would fit in with all of these comparisons.

[Forboding Angel]

I'd like to point out that I myself am a Traditional Conservative as well. TBH I haven't really heard felix speak out much, but deci and I are in perfect agreement even though I sometimes state things in a convoluted way.

Edit georgia: THis shit is getting pretty bad. THe russians are killing civilians, journalists, robbing banks, and tbh, I don't there there is one realistic damn thing the west can do about it.

Maybe if NATO or the UN would get off their collective Ginormous asses (yeah right, like that'll ever happen), we could put a stop to this. Russia is basically taking the opportunity to land grab...

[SwiftSpear]

Forb: you're not a true blue conservative. You're a conservative libertarian. The conservative motto tends to be freedom for the market, and restriction of the public (behavioral laws). Combined with religious conservatism (the most common type in the states), you get your mainstream republican. Libertarianism is common in the states, but very limited in it's political representation.

[Sleksa]

BTW - here an interview that most certainly went the wrong way and was pretty much stalled when it was obvious which way it's going...

You'll see two eyewitnesses telling how they were attacked by Georgians and "rescued" by Russia. It also becomes pretty obvious that Georgia started the attacks (on civilians)...

CLICK FOR VIDEO

Another "interesting" thing is from this interview with Mrs. Rice where after an imo valid question the "connection" suddenly fails...

CLICK HERE FOR VIDEO

I think it really is strange that when comparing 9/11 and the recent events everyone is trying so hard to make Russia look bad. I mean the number of dead is quite comparable and it seems you can call it a fact that Georgia started all this. So why is it bad when Russia strikes back "a bit" but not when the US invades two countries (with one having nothing to do with 9/11 and pretty stupid "justifications" apart from that) killing millions?

Not that I think it's good if Russia really has broken the cease fire but I fail to see as to why all this one-sided goofing on Russia is happening...

the latter video is pretty harsh

Edit georgia: THis shit is getting pretty bad. THe russians are killing civilians, journalists, robbing banks, and tbh, I don't there there is one realistic damn thing the west can do about it.

[Citation needed] ?

im guessing you read some foxnews article where they told that russian soldiers eat dead georgians and shoot everything that moves~~


From what i know, the conflict pretty much started by US arming and training (30 million$ a year for georgian military from US, 100 us army trainers in the country) georgia, and italy, germany and some other country voted against georgia's nato apply, saying georgia needs to hold 100% control over its land, implying that ossetia and abhasia need to be in georgian control or recogniced as independant countries.

Which in turn made the president sakasvili launch a blitzkrieg against ossetia under the olympics (news focused there instead of georgia). But what happened was that russia's peacekeepers were shot at, and russia sent a few hundred tanks and planes to bomb the shit out of the georgians.

The newspapers woke up and saw communist USSR fighting against a "legit and prideful east european democracy", and now the situation is that the russians covertly attacked the georgia under olympics to absorb their country back to the motherland. tnx for neutral news


There was a interesting sentence in a weekly newspaper, saying this is the first time the russians invaded a independant country after ww2, i wonder if its the same with the US?

the russians should confront US and tell them to move their invasion armies out of afghanistan and iraq and replace the NATO troops with chinese/north korean/iran peacekeepers ;]

Maybe in a few months we'll see iran "trying to attack israel with a nuke" which in turn results in iran becoming the 54'th state annexed to US (counting in the recently acquired EU, afganistan, and israel)
,getting positive support from the state of europe, saying that its ok since iran attacked first~~