Rules for winning the Nobel peace prize

[Mattey]

well, it is war. The point is to kill people. It's not make nice humanitarian exercise time.

As soon as war went from soldiers meeting on a battlefield, to "anything goes, we'll bomb your entire village" humanity and decency was lost. Modern war is criminal. Anyone that participates in it, loses their humanity and decency.

[Squeezer]

As soon as war went from soldiers meeting on a battlefield, to "anything goes, we'll bomb your entire village" humanity and decency was lost. Modern war is criminal. Anyone that participates in it, loses their humanity and decency.

Thanks Hemingway.

[Mattey]

America doesn't win wars because we are squeamish about killing now. simple as that. remember the good ole days where we charged into a country and halved their population? yeah! we won them wars! not this whole "only kill the chosen few to remain humanitarian in the world's eye" approach. if you want to win a war, pay the price and level the shit. you can't win wars with pussy tactics (well maybe you can but the cost is far higher on our end)

You are either joking or completely retarded. US VS THEM HELL YEAH BOMB THEIR CHURCHES WOOO AMERICA FUCK YEAH!!

Get fucked.

[Mattey]

Thanks Hemingway.

Just an observation, darling.

Edit: Do you believe there are no crimes committed during war time? Do you believe that anything goes in war? Do you think the geneva convention is for faggots? Should you kill yourself?

The last one is rhetorical, and the answer is yes.

[Squeezer]

Just an observation, darling.

Edit: Do you believe there are no crimes committed during war time? Do you believe that anything goes in war? Do you think the geneva convention is for faggots? Should you kill yourself?

The last one is rhetorical, and the answer is yes.

ooo clever. someone on the interwebs is telling me to kill myself again this week. maybe i'll go do it!

Do I personally believe that there are crimes comitted in war? Yes. Do I support firebombings and other massively destructive practices? No, but I support the statement that they often work. Tell me bombing factories and villages didn't destroy the morale of Germany in Western Europe, or that the atom bomb didn't absolutely devestate Japan's state of mind.

Do those regulations actually matter when the bullets and bombs are flying? Probably not. As you said, we're all involved in modern war. There's no escaping, whether you like it or not. If you can't bomb your enemy into submission, they'll do it first. I believe the old saying is, "all's fair in love and war."

Do you know anything about what it means to fight in a war? I don't believe so. I'm pretty sure you've never had to fight for your life in a battle intensive situation. I doubt you've ever had to differentiate between a civilian and an enemy or worry about being killed at any moment. Battlefields are tense places, war is full of clunky actions. Not every action is morally clean. I believe it is YOU that has the unrealistic view of war (and thus YOU THAT SHULD KILL URESELF LOPL!). Granted, I've never encountered these situations either, but I'm also not naive enough to believe that they can all be solved through judicial practices when there is a war raging all around.

Where do you get off then talking about what should or shouldn't happen in a war? Like anyone but the Gods can determine what comes about.

edit: And I think you mistook Summa's post for being literal, when in fact he was being sarcastic. That is in addition to mistaking my opinion for being pro-war, when in fact I'm simply stating that ruthless total war == victory.

[Galleleo]

Rofl para, why do you insist on making yourself look so damn stupid?

And how does "having lectured to tens (?!?!?! Tens?!?!?!) of people" any proof of your self-proclaimed expert opinion on this matter? I can lecture to hundreds of people about whatever you like and I can lie the entire way. Until you have published tons of papers on the subject and are generally considered an authority on the subject by the academic world, stfu and stop being an ignorant idiot.

[Mattey]

Not every action is morally clean. I believe it is YOU that has the unrealistic view of war.

Where do you get off then talking about what should or shouldn't happen in a war?

I don't have an unrealistic view of modern war. I would sooner lay down my life than participate in it, because I know what participating in it actually entails.

Do you believe you have to participate in something to have an opinion of it? Do movie critics have to be directors?

[Squeezer]

I don't have an unrealistic view of modern war. I would sooner lay down my life than participate in it, because I know what participating in it actually entails.

Do you believe you have to participate in something to have an opinion of it? Do movie critics have to be directors?

No but directors often make the best critics. Kinda like hockey players usually make the best hockey coaches, or fat kids growing up to be mocked as sad clowns. They have experience in their respective fields that puts them above you or I.

[dchao]

Why does this forum still exist and why are the same people still posting 8 years later?

[Squeezer]

Why does this forum still exist and why are the same people still posting 8 years later?

we still like to talk about that time we gangbanged your mom.

hi dennis :flowers:

[Mattey]

No but directors often make the best critics.

Bullshit.

[Squeezer]

heh fine, disagree with me. At least you can form complete sentences unlike paradise the forum retard ™

edit: For instance,

because I literally meant that the Afghans were talking American jobs.

Afghans don't "talk" American jobs, nor are they taking them. I have no idea what you meant because I can't understand what you're getting at...ever. I mean what the fuck did you mean? Where the hell did I mention anything about Afghans and jobs? There wasn't even a subtext that makes sense. Was it a joke? Was it an analogy or metaphor? I don't get it. You rarely have a point to make and even more rare is it that you stay on topic. Usually you throw in a bunch of non sequitor insults that fool no one into thinking you're an authority on any topic (except yourself) and only make you look like an even bigger fool. On top of that, no one, not even Exalt, has a poorer level of reading comprehension on these boards. You aren't even able to discern what the topic is about, much less who stands where and why. In short your posts are a waste and I wish you would just get banned. No one enjoys reading your posts (except for me because it gives me an excuse to not do work) and I can't recall a time when anyone agreed with you about anything...ever. Probably because no one knows what you have to say, or what you're saying is so obviously wrong that people don't want to waste their time.

I, on the other hand, have no problem wasting time :greedy:

[Mattey]

To elaborate, In my opinion, most of the best critics are removed from the process they are critiquing. Being inside the system you are critiquing, I view, as a detriment. Better perspective is gained the further you are away from a subject.

[Squeezer]

To elaborate, In my opinion, most of the best critics are removed from the process they are critiquing. Being inside the system you are critiquing, I view, as a detriment. Better perspective is gained the further you are away from a subject.

How? I should not be a judge of figure skating. I know jack shit about figure skating and would be far from qualified to make a decision as to who has the best technique, smoothest run, etc. Same goes for war in my opinion. Some find it horrifying, some take to it like ducks in water. All veterans have more meaningful things to say about the experience than I do.

[Mattey]

All veterans? Really?

Edit: and as to your figure skating analogy, I agree that experiencing figure skating can help you understand how it is judged, but is not strictly necessary. As a counter-example, I've never played hockey but know that Ovechkin is a great player.