Spring RTS Engine

Sounds like

Yes well liberals often criticize the right-wing fear campaign, but that's the only thing that seems to be able to rile the general public enough to gather support for wars.

This brings us back to the point that war is necessary sometimes and anyone who believes differently is just inviting in others to take advantage of them.

Anyway who cares if brown-people civilians in the middle east get shot to death in their homes at night by mercenaries.. am I right or am I wrong.

truthfully, no one really cares. The whole "out of sight, out of mind thing" People get upset for a few days then forget about it because snooky got a new nose job or vuvzela at world cup.

Cheesecan wrote:This brings us back to the point that war is necessary sometimes and anyone who believes differently is just inviting in others to take advantage of them.

war might be averted
but
war may be necessary

they are not contradictory. Fostering peace is not a refusal to go to war.

KingRaptor wrote:

momfreeek wrote:So.. if a country of warring tribes can transition to millions living in essentially peaceful coexistence (ofc there is still crime and gangs and murder, but thats not 'war' exactly ) why can't a continent or the whole world?

Disclaimer: Non-expert nutshell opinion, do not cite
also off topic

The way I see it, this is due to the ethnocentrism of previous generations persisting (albeit in a weaker state), merely applied to larger groups as a result of increasing community size.

I've been trying to get my head round this. Smaller ethnocentric groups come together into a larger community and live in peace. Isn't that exactly whats happening in europe right now?

The differences seem insurmountable before the change but afterwards peace feels entirely natural; thus its not intuitive to imagine how it could happen on the larger scale.

momfreeek wrote:

Cheesecan wrote:This brings us back to the point that war is necessary sometimes and anyone who believes differently is just inviting in others to take advantage of them.

war might be averted
but
war may be necessary

they are not contradictory. Fostering peace is not a refusal to go to war.

Averting war is a precautionary action. When war is necessary it's always necessary.

momfreeek wrote:

KingRaptor wrote:

momfreeek wrote:So.. if a country of warring tribes can transition to millions living in essentially peaceful coexistence (ofc there is still crime and gangs and murder, but thats not 'war' exactly ) why can't a continent or the whole world?

Disclaimer: Non-expert nutshell opinion, do not cite
also off topic

The way I see it, this is due to the ethnocentrism of previous generations persisting (albeit in a weaker state), merely applied to larger groups as a result of increasing community size.

I've been trying to get my head round this. Smaller ethnocentric groups come together into a larger community and live in peace. Isn't that exactly whats happening in europe right now?

The differences seem insurmountable before the change but afterwards peace feels entirely natural; thus its not intuitive to imagine how it could happen on the larger scale.

Perhaps genetics is the best way to create peace, simply by eliminating a few genes here and there we could become non-violent beings incapable of harming a fly. If genetic engineering at that scale can become as cheap as a pill..

Cheesecan wrote:Perhaps genetics is the best way to create peace, simply by eliminating a few genes here and there we could become non-violent beings incapable of harming a fly. If genetic engineering at that scale can become as cheap as a pill..

...and then the few guys (or animals..?) left will conquer the world and enslave you all.

Was nice plan until i came to destroy it

momfreeek wrote:

KingRaptor wrote:

momfreeek wrote:So.. if a country of warring tribes can transition to millions living in essentially peaceful coexistence (ofc there is still crime and gangs and murder, but thats not 'war' exactly ) why can't a continent or the whole world?

Disclaimer: Non-expert nutshell opinion, do not cite
also off topic

The way I see it, this is due to the ethnocentrism of previous generations persisting (albeit in a weaker state), merely applied to larger groups as a result of increasing community size.

I've been trying to get my head round this. Smaller ethnocentric groups come together into a larger community and live in peace. Isn't that exactly whats happening in europe right now?

The differences seem insurmountable before the change but afterwards peace feels entirely natural; thus its not intuitive to imagine how it could happen on the larger scale.

It only took around 100 million deaths in europe(just in the 20th century) to achieve that...
Europe is the bloodiest continent on earth and there were wars being waged on it just a few years back so im not sure what your talking about...
How about kosovo?
Recent gergian war?
West Europe(or maybe you consider only western Europe as "Europe"? )has been in peace for 60 years after 2 world wars waged mostly on it and you present it as some sort of a model?

Mmmh.. gota, lots of people died on other continents, lets say that europe is the continent with the best documented massacre history. Everywhere else, if you drop dead, there is no bureocraut documenting it- you are just that, dead - earth, humus, food for worms and plants.

Perhaps genetics is the best way to create peace, simply by eliminating a few genes here and there

Hitler tried, people did not like it.

momfreeek wrote:. Isn't that exactly whats happening in europe right now?

what bubble are you living in?

here you go:
http://godhatesjapan.com/

be sure to donate.

related (found it on digg)

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/15/th ... fifty.html epic heroics!

Cheesecan wrote:Averting war is a precautionary action. When war is necessary it's always necessary.

necessary war is necessary. brilliant. That says nothing for the preceding opportunites that could have lead to a different course of events (assuming you don't believe in an entirely predeterministic universe).

smoth wrote:

momfreeek wrote:. Isn't that exactly whats happening in europe right now?

what bubble are you living in?

Is that a no? (western) europe is a united community in a completely different way from 70 years ago and ever before that (except, perhaps roman times?). It may just be set for a fall, it may just be a reaction to war that will fade, but it might be something new. If you can prove it one way or the other, please do, but don't just acuse me of closed mindedness.

just because the eu is not engaged in a world war does not mean that the tensions were dropped or that the eu is some sort of civilized utopia. People still have their differences and you will see it during games. I am not acusing, I am saying, you are closed minded. ESP if you believe that society has somehow conquered the human animal. Sure there has not been a major world war, that is not a measuring stick for diddle. Post wwI people stopped thinking of war as a glorious thing, so people want to go to war less and less. Senseless nationalism was borne and I think it is a horrid form of mind control. The only thing keeping people remotely in check is not wanting to die a horrible death or being tortured. Actually tortured, not humiliated, you know where they start taking physical parts of your body. People are comfortable and complacent living easy lives and feel no need to riot or act too much like animals. Except when that life is in trouble.. looking at you Greece.

The global power goes beyond the pretentious things like borders and on to markets and wealth. People once did war for power, now they just do finance.

NONE OF THIS proves that human beings are still horrible creatures capable of what you lovey dovey fellas wanna call inhuman. links provided by lazy google search and grabbing a few results. Except fritlz who is just bizarre. Anyway, still violent creatures.. I love how the last one was a racial crime.. gotten over past differences indeed.
*edits for some more thoughts* just saying man, human beings can be downright awful and the borders that people so pride themselves on are just imaginary lines. This is a race problem, a human race problem. The world is always going to be ugly, human beings are going to keep being bad. I live my life as nice as I can but the next guy. I cannot promise he will, in fact he probably won't

I never said anything about a utopia or everythign being perfect. You are misunderstadning me. I'm just talking about war and communities.

smoth wrote:just because the eu is not engaged in a world war does not mean that the tensions were dropped or that the eu is some sort of civilized utopia. People still have their differences and you will see it during games.

Agreed. Venting tensions and resolving disputes in less destructive ways is half the problem solved. It was cheesecan who thought we need to 'cure' human nature, not me.

smoth wrote:People once did war for power, now they just do finance.

Agreed. War-mongering would clearly be worse.

smoth wrote:*edits for some more thoughts* just saying man, human beings can be downright awful and the borders that people so pride themselves on are just imaginary lines. This is a race problem, a human race problem. The world is always going to be ugly, human beings are going to keep being bad. I live my life as nice as I can but the next guy. I cannot promise he will, in fact he probably won't

Agreed. The natural way of things is violence and survival at the expense of others. I think the advances in human thinking and knowledge that have lead to your attitude should be regarded as steps forward and not taken for granted.

bobthedinosaur wrote:here you go:
http://godhatesjapan.com/

be sure to donate.

Their intentions are good but their methods are...childish.

http://www.viceland.com/blogs/en/2011/0 ... interview/ an interview with one of those facebook haters

"Do you think that there should maybe be some sort of law that prohibits US news stations from reporting too heavily on foreign issues? Like, in an ideal world, would you just have no idea that there had even been a tsunami because it didnÔÇÖt happen in America?

Yes. ThatÔÇÖs the kind of world I want to live in."

Ungh, a liberal conspiracy theorist. And we're shocked because he posted something idiotic on facebook? Why?

In that case, present your case. Tell me why Japan deserved to be hit with a tsunami.

I think Japan did deserve what happened last week. But I want to make it clear that itÔÇÖs not about being racist or something, because IÔÇÖm not racist. I think growing up listening to teachers preach to us about Japan and what happened in Pearl Harbor, and movies about Japanese wars or people in general are the reason people say things like what I said. People develop a hatred for someone or a population of people by something they know about them or something they did.

movies about japanese wars, tonight at 9 after tyler perrys' "meet the browns" on peachtree TV!