Messages

The UN failed.  Actually, I don't really blame the UN.  I blame France.  I'm disgusted by France's unwillingness to help the US.  The 56,681 Americans who died liberating France in World Wars I and II are rolling over in their graves.

http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/sfelshin/saintonge/frhist.html - why don't we go a little further back than a convenient time frame?

I would imagine that the US is stepping in.  But if it doesn't come down to military action it doesn't get much press.  I don't like the cynasism in the world that demands that there's always deceit in every situation.  Why can't the reason that sounds good and the truth sometimes be the same?

Because this wasn't the reason to begin with. You can try to console yourself with it, feel very noble and Bush is counting on that to win him his next election. Regardless, it is irrelevant, it was not the cause of this war. Cuba was closer if you just needed to feel good about yourself.

It's not like the US said, "Well, they might attack us so let's invade" that's silly.  Iraq has been defying the UN for 12 years since the end of the Gulf War?  We didn't (necessarily) invade Iraq just because of their potential threat.  We invaded because they weren't disarming and were defying the sanctions put on them after the Gulf War.  They were throwing it in the worlds faces.  Denying interviews with weapons inspectors, denying them entrance into certain areas, denying them entrance into Iraq at all.  Then giving the run around about supposedly disarming.  They were asking for it.  I think they wanted this war.

Two words: North Korea.  

Removing a dictator from power and freeing an oppressed people is not 'accomplishing little'.  Again, I say I am afraid of world reaction to what we're doing over there, but again, it's worth it, for the people of Iraq.  I know, and hate that fact, that many will die because of the war in Iraq.  But if Saddam is left in power, far worse tradgedies will continue, in Iraq and possibly around the world.

Yeah, somehow given the US history and its attitude towards the rest of the world, especially those who disagree with it, doesn't really allow me to attribute this war to thier sense of goodwill towards other peoples.  

I didn't misinterpret you, I just don't agree with you.  Freedom is freedom, and everybody should have it.

China is not exactly free. Yet the US has no problems whatsoever carrying on trade with them and injecting money into thier economy. This war isn't about freedom. And again, I question the appointment of the US as the arbiter of freedom for the whole world. It is absurd and it is arrogant.

I doubt most people will dislike you unless you attack them, instead of attacking the points they make. Everyone's allowed to have an opinion and most people posting anti-war here don't have a problem with you, they have a problem with the war.

I've refrained from making any personal attacks on you, I know nothing about you. The points you make however, are fair game.

[suspicion]

The idea that the US is the arbiter of freedom in the 'free' world sounds pretty arrogant to me.  "Oh,you don't meet our ideas of freedom, off you go!"

If we (America) don't do it, who will?  Do you think just because Saddam's regime doesn't meet our ideas of freedom we should let him go on killing people?  What about Milosovich?  What about Hitler?  What about Mohammad Farrah Aidid?  These people shouldn't continue to benefit in their reigns of terror just because they don't meet our ideas of freedom.  You either misinterpret what I said/meant or perhaps don't agree?

The reasons given by the administration have changed almost every day, depending on what suits the current mood of the public.

The initial reason for this war was that "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and we must initiate a preemptive strike in order to stop him from attacking us in the future."

It has changed from that to being about not complying with the UN resolutions, coupled with telling the UN that the US doesnt really give a rats ass about its opinion, while at the same time conveniently using its resolutions as a reason.

The third and now the noble reason, ah to liberate the people of iraq. They are so opressed. Well people are opressed all over the world, why isnt the US stepping in there? There's a saying that goes 'A man usually has two reasons for doing anything, one reason that sounds good, another that is the truth'. This is the reason that sounds good.

In my opinion, the US has lowered the standards for starting a war. There was no attack by anyone, there was no evidence that there would ever be an attack, there was nothing but a suspicion that he might attack at some future unspecified date. Tomorrow if someone decides the US might attack them sometime in the future, sort of like what n korea is saying, then are they wrong when they attack the US? That reasoning gives every country a reason to attack almost any other country who shows the least bit of aggression towards them. Hell, Saddam didnt even blink towards the US before all this started.

Again, its not about Saddam being good, it is about railroading the world into a war that is causing casualties on all sides and accomplishing little except wiping out every bit of goodwill the US has had in the world, in the short space of a couple of months.

PS: I think you misinterpreted what I meant. I meant that the US cannot just appoint itself arbiter of what does and does not define freedom according to its own ideas of freedom. So you can't just go attack a country because it is not conforming to what your idea of freedom is. Everybody will end up attacking everybody. Unless you somehow intend to apply this rule to the US only, in which you are making it the arbiter of freedom for the entire world.

[Argument:]

Argument:
US is sticking its nose in where it shouldn't (paraphrasing)

My Response:
Freedom is, in my opinion, the simplest and most important value in the world.  It is something that I feel a lot of people take for granted.  Because I think, and very deeply feel, that freedom should be a worldwide right, I think that where ever there is an injustice, where ever there is a tyrant, where ever there is oppression, where ever there is a people being restricted and denied their freedom, somebody should step up and help out.  To restore freedom where it has been removed.  It seems to me (just my opinion) that it's always the US who steps up.  Why anybody else can't I don't know.  In the words of the constitution "... all men are created equal."  This doesn't just mean Americans.  All people are equal and deserve to have freedom ... use whatever form of government you want, but you must have freedom

The idea that the US is the arbiter of freedom in the 'free' world sounds pretty arrogant to me.  "Oh,you don't meet our ideas of freedom, off you go!"

Ever hear of consensus? And I dont meant a consensus of convenience.

darth: Business and economy prospers in the war due to massive government spending, as you said, the government spent 60 billion dollars on this, this means that that 60 bill will go towards the businessess or whatever has any relation towards the war.

To put it in proper terms, the government has made a 60 billion dollar injection into the economy.

just thought I'd try and clarify that point for you

Injection from where? The government doesn't MANUFACTURE MONEY. The government takes money from taxpayers and uses it for various reasons. The war is one of those reasons. The government is not pulling this money out of thin air, it is taking it out of the taxpayers pockets and spending it outside the country on a war that in no way benefits them economically at the moment.  

And might I point out the wonderful people who own these weapons factories and those who will get the no-doubt-lucrative contracts to rebuild iraq are the ones who are gaining, along with anyone who they care to 'contribute' to.

So there goes that excuse.

LOL! You think the US media is completely truthful and accurate? OMG, I so did not know that! You learn something new every day.  :

Of course, its on tv so it MUST be true. They wouldn't lie, would they...Ever think they only show you the bits they want you to see?

Oh and another thing, dont make anti-war = pro-saddam. It is NOT the same thing.

Anyone notice that it seems 99% of the people FOR war are americans? Where are people from around the world who totally agree with what the US is doing?  

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/20/opinion/20HERB.html?ex=1048741200&en=be3ec393f12b1ffd&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

Well, we've got till Friday to decide...but so far looks like landmark is winning.

I talked to m0ds and he says he would love to put up the backgrounds, so when you submit the backgrounds please explicitly state that you would not mind your backs being used in this manner. Just add the line (Permission granted to submit to AGDzine) below the background.

If you don't wish to submit it, you needn't state anything at all.
It is perfectly acceptable to say no to this, and I don't think it will detract from the entry in any way.

Heh thats two votes for landmark and two for film noir. Although one of the film noir ones is a non-participating vote. Anyone else?

AGDZine, I'll talk to m0ds and see.

In my opinion, there is already inta-game for that. The authors of the backgrounds are free to do whatever they wish with them, including submitting it to insta-game. Maybe not everyone would like to donate thier backgrounds, that's fine too. I don't think we can decide for them.

If you'd like to donate them to insta-game, or just mark them for free use by anyone while posting them, I think that might work better.

If anyone else has any thoughts tho...

Hm, would people be up for the film noir thingy?  

While I'm here, I might as well add some topics :

A pawn shop.
What the inside of your fridge looks like when the light goes out.
A haunted house.
The kitchen at pizza hut.
A school cafeteria just after lunchtime is over.

Heh. Thanks guys, whoever played it.

The purpose of the game is kinda hard to understand if you havent played tropico. Like why she wants to go to America and work for poptop, or why there are tarantula's in the banana field or why there's a voodoo priest on the island.

But there are reasons for all these things.

And  : @ Layabout

And I thought no violins?

Moderate violence.

How about a restaurant in space? Or  a mountain top restaurant is Tibet.

Weird is not the keyword. Interesting is the keyword.

How about a bar after its been invaded by a group of rampant Alcohol Anon'ers?
or an ice cream parlour after its been invaded by a group of rampany Weight Warchers?  :o

Heh I really like the appliances thing. Lets do that unless someone objects.

Hey, I really like those!

Reason for asking for not too much sex and violence is they are recurring themes and overdone, not to mention there isn't much you can do with them anyway. Its the Spingerization of art.

I'm not opposed to them, but I think people will come up with more interesting topics given the call for moderation(thats the word) in those two areas. I'm not looking for pink bunnies, but I'm not looking for BDSM either. I hope no one really has a problem with that.

Finished this last August(for a non-ags audience) and didnt get around to posting it on the AGS boards.  But these people in IRC won't leave me alone until I do so here it is:

Island Quest

This is based on the game Tropico, if you've played it, you'll enjoy the game more.

Two things:
1. Hang on to the keys, you cant give them to the agent. (This is the point where almost everyone seems to get stuck) and
2. Save often - there are a couple of ways to die. Yes die.

Oh yeah walkthrough is here. But don't use it unless you have to.  ^_^

Heh guys, can we stick to just the topics in this thread please? And I'm kind of hoping we don't get too many bizzare or sax and violins themes because IMO that isn't nearly as good as an unusual background idea, being as common as it is.

Some nice ideas here so far.

For those who don't get what sax and violins is, say it out loud a few times.

Anyone have any ideas for interesting backgrounds they care to share?  

I'm going to add the (modified) rules for the blitz here since they arent posted every time:

This is going to differ from the sprite jam in two ways. I think it would be better if we voted for the winner instead of someone bring picked out by just one person. So we'll have a voting period after the end of the period so people can vote on the thread.

And two, we'll have an ongoing list of topics on a thread that people can just post thier ideas on and we'll just pick one out of there. This gives people who don't always win or participate but have good ideas a chance to contribute.

The winner gets the satisfaction of winning by vote and we'll make a gallery of the winners backgrounds.

Mmm tracing over photos not allowed, this isnt enforceable but you'll live with your conscience if you do it.   Comp ends every other midnight Friday UK time, voting until friday night. New comp begins friday evening simultanously with votes. Votes tallied saturday morning. That allows about two weeks for getting stuff done and I hope more than enough time for voting.