Rbz Posts

Huh. The more you know~. I was not aware of this, then on the other hand I'm not that knowledgeable about the North Korean situation past what is common knowledge.

Absolutely not. Entering a full scale war with NK is out of the question. First of all, NK supposedly have nuclear weapons and the technology to launch it from their soil to pretty much anywhere they want.
Secondly, the entire world lacks information about NK and their military strength, number and tactics. It would be the US entering Vietnam again where they had no fucking idea what they were to be in for.
Thirdly, there is nothing stopping China from backing NK up in said situation, and if they would enter the conflict on the NK side then we would most like have WWIII on our doorstep.

Nope, the US shouldn't point their guns at NK, diplomacy is the way to go in this situation.

Also, I am under the impression that Kim Yong Un is pretty.. well, in lack for a better term: liberal, compared to his father. I mean, since he entered into leadership NK has been more open to the world than it has been in decades. Baby steps, dude.

Absolutely, but you seem to be under the impression that the US line their troupes up by the thousand and tell them to stand tall and fire all 17th century style.

The US have suffered less than 10 000 military losses in total for the last 30 years. That's a third of the annual death rate in car accidents. Not saying that the military isn't dangerous, but you hardly sign your own death warrant either.

What I want to know is what scale you think the US is waging wars at.

I has always kinda rubbed me the wrong way. It can be that I have a hard time looking away from the fact that I really like the book and that I actually read it before I watched the movie.

Trying to look at the movie objectively I have a hard time to take Jack Nicholsons character seriously in the movie. He does a great performance, absolutely, but I find the character more comedic than realistic and scary. I put The Shining somewhere along the lines of the Terror on Elm street movies in scary/comedic sense.

To be honest though. Kubrick's The Shining is a very bad adaption of a very good book. It's also pretty bad in its own right.

I doubt it, but seeing how I listen to a fairly wide spectra of music and wear, to be honest, pretty plain clothing I'll just assume that some of what I wear "fit" some of the music that I listen to.

Make a proper thread, read the rules. This is nowhere near a thread suitable for SD.

Truefax, soldiers are bred in heaps and have neither family nor friends. They are also incapable of giving and accepting love.


Class =! being put on a pedestal. You should go out and learn the difference.


I want to butt into this conversation again, I haven't read through the entire thread, and I'm not about to so this might already have been answered but I would really like an answer to this: LA, what is your stance on sex? Yay or nay for women and men?

I'm at a loss for words. I am, however, a bit sad that you choose to ignore me.

You presented a choice(eating vs. abstaining), I however didn't. But this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.


Come-fucking-again? First and foremost, I don't think you really know how a construction site functions. It's not a playground for muscular men where they carry lumber and rocks as they brandish their oiled, muscular bodies in the sunset as they tear down/build houses with their bare hands.

We go through grades because you have to learn the basics and go upwards. You can't present advanced calculus to an adult who has never learned to do math and expect him to solve it either, now can you? You don't magically gain knowledge by getting older.


The benefit is equality. There is no need for women to join the force, nor should there be, but the option should always be available for those who want it.


Well, would a man who has never trained for warfare be more of use? I highly doubt it.


What are these women being forced into? The point is that a woman should be able to do as she wants, regardless of what that is. If a woman(or man, for that part) wants to be a housewife(man) and stay home and care for the household as their partner chases a career, that option should be available. If they want to do [insert any occupation here], they should be able to.


Yes, they are by definition ageist. However, these laws exist because adults/the government believe that they can't trust the judgement of young people. If this is true or not is up for discussion.


If it were common for male ballet dancers to wear skirts you wouldn't stick out. You would only stick out because of social conventions that make it so.


Again, social conventions.


No one said you hate women, heck, I never thought you did. I say that you are sexist, objectifying and degrading.


Number hardly equals progress. It's a big factor of course, but not the key one.


I don't even know how to respond to this. I would consider not being allowed to vote, drive, get an education, work, be frivolous, have male acquaintances, be out by yourself, show your hair, dress however you want, speak up for yourself or simply do whatever you want to be pretty fucking deprived of your rights. But now, that might just be me.


The point is that, given the opportuinity, there is hardly any reason at all why a woman can't excel as good as a man in any given field in today's society.


No, your society is weak because of the backwash, dark-aged mindset of people like you not allowing people who could make your society a better place do so.

Hah.

Well, pointless arguing is one of the things that keep me going.

That's not an analogy, but w/e.


I want to ask you what it means for a woman to be a woman, and a man to be a man? Is this not subjective and up to each individual to decide for themselves?


Are you somehow trying to blame this recession on the progress for equality?


Religion would be one obvious answer. There are countless of factors that have caused societies to repress women throughout history.

Wait what? Did you just compare the differences between genders to eating poisonous food? Wat. That's not even an analogy.



I think you missed the part where I said that you should accept and embrace the differences between genders. I get the feeling your trying to tell me the same thing I just told you, just with a lot more stupid.

Come again? Over here a woman can go get an abortion (for free if under the age of 25) no questions asked and no reasons needed up until the 4th month of pregnancy. Just saying, after that you'd need to appeal to Social Services about it and I guarantee that medical threats are not the only reason they'll allow. They'll also take economical and social situations into account

Just felt like pointing that out.

Now, on topic.

To me, feminism means to accept the differences between genders, both physical and psychological. I would go as far as to say you should even embrace these difference but at the same time, a feminist should understand that these differences don't mean squat in today's society.

You really can't argue that there aren't any differences between genders, because they are there whether you like it or not, but the point is that they don't matter.

Well, as Klown said, WoW is, and remains one of the most well made MMO's in existence today (EVE remains THE single most well made MMO ever made imo, but is hardly comparable since they have nothing in common other than being online.)

If you want to play WoW, then go do it. But be warned that with all the expansions that are out, and all the history that the game has can make it a bit harder to get into than you'd think(Mostly community stuff, actual gameplay is pretty simple).

Hey now, no one thinks that.

We think you're stupid and possibly retarded. Nothing more, nothing less.

Word.

Me, I haven't done anything today really, but I'm about to go out, get drunk and have a good time. Smartest thing I've done all week.

There is no guarantee that tearing -will- happen. It often, most often even, do but hardly on every single woman. Ofc there are women who suffer from some severe tearing (usually from the child having it's arm up by its ear, getting more and more usual, believe to be due to ultrasounds.) but that number is relatively small.

And yeah, what Jack said.

Not that weird, but clearly underage.