Spring RTS Engine

(?)

I thought there were a german spring forum somewhere if you're up to posting links in german...

oh. english link for the usfags:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

knorke wrote:the usfags

you are gay?

I don't get it...

us is a pronoun

smoth wrote:us is a pronoun

the united states are substitutes for a noun?

US or U.S. are actually proper forms as it is an acronym.

smoth wrote:us is a pronoun

Oh no, that I understood. What I didn't get is the OP.

parody of my thread on libya making the nazi reference because people started equating america=fascists warmongers in libya thread.

So now we've got parody threads of parody threads?

I really wanted to discuss libya so I was not trying to parody.

when you make a thread about Libya, chances are, that some people (eg lybians) get offended about what will be said. you seem not to see a problem there. but when someone says something that US citizens could feel insulted for, it is bad; not becuase the thread is not about the US, but because saying something insulting for US citizens is bad in general.

i make a thread titled: "US foreign politics"
with first post content: "let US discuss us foreign politics here."
and my intention is to only talk about US foreign politics nicely.
... could that be my intention? really? why not?
no, it could not. because being anything else then hallucinated, it is obvious that this would not be possible.
if i really only wanted to discuss US foreign politics nicely, would being so stupid to really expect that to happen not take any rights for complaining from me?
i say it would.

if there is something special going on in a country X, and an other country Y is involved, secretly or not, what is the most likely candidate for Y?
if X has oil/is a Muslim state, how does that affect the probability for Y being that most likely candidate?

-> wanting to talk about special stuff happening in X, which has oil and is a Muslim state, and expecting that most likely candidate not being mentioned in any way is simply stupid. note that, whether you believe that this most likely candidate for Y actually cares about Muslim states and oil does not matter. what matters is whether a sufficient enough number of the other people around think so. not knowing that this number is sufficient, being a long time frequent forum goer, is impossible.

Godwins law applies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

hoijui wrote:when you make a thread about Libya, chances are, that some people (eg lybians) get offended about what will be said. you seem not to see a problem there. but when someone says something that US citizens could feel insulted for, it is bad; not becuase the thread is not about the US, but because saying something insulting for US citizens is bad in general.

I made a thread about the fact that the un has decided to take a stance with regards to libya. Nothing about libya, who is right who is wrong etc. The thread consisted of two sentences neither of which were judgmental nor were they about libya instead they are about the actions the un, of which many members of this community belong to(usa, france etc).

hoijui wrote:i make a thread titled: "US foreign politics"
with first post content: "let US discuss us foreign politics here."
and my intention is to only talk about US foreign politics nicely.
... could that be my intention? really? why not?

go ahead, I am not stopping you. Largely I don't follow them closely enough to even get half of what they are doing and when I try I get frustrated by the system. you can enjoy the headache of it. Personally, I don't believe the parties are real and our "vote" in the states is an illusion.

hoijui wrote:no, it could not. because being anything else then hallucinated, it is obvious that this would not be possible.

Why can't it be?

hoijui wrote:if i really only wanted to discuss US foreign politics nicely, would being so stupid to really expect that to happen not take any rights for complaining from me?
i say it would.

I don't follow your sentence, can you reword it?

hoijui wrote:if there is something special going on in a country X, and an other country Y is involved, secretly or not, what is the most likely candidate for Y?
if X has oil/is a Muslim state, how does that affect the probability for Y being that most likely candidate?
-> wanting to talk about special stuff happening in X, which has oil and is a Muslim state, and expecting that most likely candidate not being mentioned in any way is simply stupid. note that, whether you believe that this most likely candidate for Y actually cares about Muslim states and oil does not matter. what matters is whether a sufficient enough number of the other people around think so. not knowing that this number is sufficient, being a long time frequent forum goer, is impossible.

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Take a breath and reword?

the US is big. it is involved in a lot of stuff happening outside the US. this naturally brings at least as many haters as lovers.
if you want to talk about anything political that is going on in the world, it is not too unlikely that the US is somehow involved in the happenings, however obvious. if it involves oil and muslims even, and you honestly expect the discussion to not ever touch the US at all, you are just ... thinking in the wrong universe.
ok, picasso does that too, and he is awesome, but this is different.

it is like you expecting a wild elephant in an unprotected area of africa not to harm you, because you are a nice person that does not want to harm him.

oh look, another thread about America

Libya doesn't have that much oil, just some high quality from what I understand. Even so, I can see your point. So why isn't the discussion about the possibility of CIA meddling being the cause of the current situation? ESP if the taliban are involved in this as ghadafi says. I guess my thoguhts are that we should be able to talk about this without these negative emotions. Emotional raging or debating only results in muddying the issue rather than calm discussion.

To me it is like this:

ManA: Have you heard about the soccer playoffs?
ManB: you are all giant cocksmokers!
ManA: How so?
ManB: RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE
ManA: what could I have done to upset him
ManB: incoherent rambling, disconnected thoughts, questionable "facts"

This is what I see. To me man b should calmly talk to man a about his problem. When I spent like a month in Italia, I would honestly talk to people about the bush situation(he was pres at the time). I learned a lot about how they felt and how bush set things back. About how they had experienced things and reacted to them. It allowed me to get a different perspective.

I think that no matter how volatile people may feel, on real issues, it is important to be calm and detached when explaining/discussing things. It may seem heartless but emotion has little place in that sort of discussion and will only set it back. People begin to "fill in gaps" rather than recognizing areas they are weak in and will begin to twist things. Maybe I think about things from way too analytical a perspective but I personally feel that unless you are on a personal level with the person in question emotions have no place. Say like if I want to fight with forb, I can be emotional. When you are talking about a nation of 100s of millions it is important to consider that a discerning opinion could ripple through them with great and good effect. I believe that sentiment carries and that if people would just give each other benefit of a doubt instead of screaming and making shit up, man so much would be better.

what it looks like to me:
you are manA, the elephant is manB.

i spent 6 months away once, and i learned a lot. but i did learn all through the 6 months, so if i had stayed longer... or say, i could not see why i would suddenly have stopped learning more. of course, to me, it is like i learned everything, as i can not imagine there to be anything else. but seen from afar... that is quite impossible. i feel vastly superior to the ones that did not go at all, but i know others that went for 2 years or more, more then one time, more then one place maybe. how would they see me?
there are few that stayed as short as me, but that is something else.

who else find hitlers speech interesting ?