Messages

2ma2 is not greek, so I don't see what he's got to do with anything.

Linus Larsson is just an alias for Linus Daphnopoulos, didn't you know?

Spoiler

Linus was the name of various greek mythological figures, all sons of Apollo. Larsson is "Son of Lars", Lars is a variant of Lawrence, which ultimately comes from the Laurel. Daphne is the Greek name for Laurel... and poulos is the greek patronymic, so...

[close]

Yes, you're right GG.

If you tell me EXACTLY what you're trying to achieve, Rui, I can tell you the best way to do it or perhaps make a small change to the module to make it easier.

Updated to fix a bug Maverick found.

As for images, I do want to add it sometime, but I'm not sure when I'll have time...

You mentioned how the invasion of Iraq backfired in a way that almost benefited the UN, simply because it became blatant what a bad decision it was. Well, to many of us it was blatant even before it happened. It shouldn't have had to happen. We have a history to lean on, we have the Vietnam, we have South America, we already know what's working and what's not.

Well, to be fair to the USA, I can see how the Afghan invasion (which was multilateral: most troops were Afghan Northern Alliance in fact, supported by UN resolutions and less dodgy than the Iraq invasion in most people's eyes, IMHO) had convinced it that it would have not much insurgency and post-invasion trouble. The insurgency in Afghanistan only really took off after the Iraq invasion, although there had been a few signs in January 2003.

Of course, they failed to appreciate:

1. The Ba'athists might be ready for insurgency faster than the Taliban
2. Many probably saw Afghanistan as a direct revenge for 9/11 and to some extent "fair enough". Iraq was nowhere near "fair" in anyone excpet the most hawkish's eyes.
3. Iraq was unilateral, rather than multilateral
amongst other things...

And of course, I'm just talking about the practicalities of post-invasion here, rather than any ethical basis of the invasion.

Try a game made with a more recent version of AGS, e.g. Cure for the Common Cold...

Shame CJ didn't make a "Please enter registratuin code" box when starting the editor  on April 1st...

No, others have made bad AGS games since then... oh, THAT yoda?


Which game should REALLY have won the p3N1S award?

I'll respond in detail later. In the mean time, you might want to look up "nationalism". You can start here and here.

Surely if you use the "love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it" definition of nationalism, then EVERY war is nationalistic, so tagging a war as nationalistic is pointless. Of course, since some people mean "the doctrine that your national culture and interests are superior to any other" by nationalism, then tagging something that meets one definition, and then using another is confusing and potentially offensive.

When you copied from one comp to another, was the the old comp's disk set to read-only or something like that? Try checking the file permissions...

[Just to piss you off even more, if the UN had sent in troops to Greece to overthrow the junta, I would probably have supported that, too. (Before my time, though.)

I wouldn't say that a list of wars that have been fought in the name of nationalism is a strong argument for why it's a good thing.

Errr... the Greeks fighting Italians, Germans and the civil war was all really WWII-related, I'd hardly call that "nationalistic". As for throwing out the Ottomans, they did that about 45 years after the Americans threw out the Brits...

Your idea of a 'posse breaking down the door and killing the neibour's kids' is EXACTLY your countrys method of foreign policy, and it's disgusting and should be fought against.

To be fair, Helm, I think his idea was to form a posse to STOP the neighbour from hitting his kids, not to kill them...

How has no-one mentioned this one...



More at: http://web.archive.org/web/20021019161525/monkeygames.mixnmojo.com/runhot/art.htm

Perhaps people who have been forum members for less than a year shoudl be automatically banned from posting on the 14th Feb and the 25th December.... any other days?

Dear SSH, the french resistence was born in 1946.

Please explain? Who then blew up all those Germans in France before the Normandy invasions?

Anyway, if you mean that the US army deserves a revolt as much as the Nazi army did... Well... it' s up to you. Do you really compare the USA with Hitler' s Germany?

Now you move to "Iraq insurgency" is equal to "French resistance"? Now you mention the resistance against Franco in Spain... Are you moving the line? Are you trying to say that "some violence is good"?

No, I compared the insurgency in one occupied country with the insurgency in another and said neither were childish. You can pretend I said other things as well if you find it easier to refute things I didn't say than things I did.

I would really liked that the situation got stabilised and that people had peace.

We agree!

And really... How can bombing in markets, commisaries, and mosques be a revolt against foreign invaders?

An American expert on suicide combing studied hundreds of bomibngs and spoke to bomber trainers, failed bombers, etc. to try and understand the motiviation, etc. It is a tactical move to try and force and occupying power to leave, he concluded, and not intended as a personal attack on the particular victims. If a parent confiscates a child's doll as a punishment, its not because they hate the doll, but to try and chance the child's behaviour.

I think you can agree with me that a civil war between sunnis and chiis is childish.

No more than any other war

But Helm, that, preciselly, is what a high amount of people does with me (assuming that I am an "imperialist kid killer") when I talk of Iraq.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I think you are neither imperialist nor killer and I understand your points. Yes, wild America-bashing is stupid. But you are really bad at arguing, Nacho. Your arguments are full of logical fallacies and I could argue better for your side of things myself. But I still like you!

And I think it's annoying and presumptuous to readily brandish racial stereotypes based on what appears be a deliberate mischaracterization of one person's analogy.

Who brandished a racial stereotype? Where?

SSH, are you ageist? Do you believe adults are somehow better than children? 

Strawmen. It's not my reaction that is the point, but rather those characterised as children in your analogy. I'm not getting offended on their behalf, I'm just pointing out that some Americans in general and Mr Bush in particular have let slip words like "Crusade" and "Axis of Evil" that have caused huge offence. It was presented in jest, because I know from your previous posts which side of the line in the sand you tend to stand on, but there was a serious point there too: when there is already so much hatred of America in Arab countries, you've got to be very careful not to offend. And invading the whole fucking country is hardly careful.

How did you manage to skim it so shallowly that you only took away a spirit of condescension?

Well, Nacho seemed to read it the same way...

Well that I simply do not believe. If you have the resources, the manpower and the logistical know-how to undertake such a vast invasion I simply WILL NOT buy the idea that you haven't planned for what happens after.
Whatever is happening in Iraq at the moment - as chaotic as it may seem - has been foreseen and planned. I'm absolutely convinced of that.

Have you EVER worked for a large company?

I see Griff is still in there! Now, if only we could have the best of both worlds... a completed BOE/BL with the hi-res!

"51% of the americans voted Bush, so, they are arrogant"

I said: "47% of the iraquians support killing american soldiers, so, they are childish"

Curious... Why yor rule of three works and mine not?

OK, forget Bush, I don't think I said that Bush voters made America arrogant, anyway. How were the French resistance, who probably had more than 47% support of the French, NOT childish?

I just have said that 500 people killing theirselfs in front of an unique hope of freedom and democracy is childish, mainly because we haven' t seen these attitudes before, when some dictadures felt in some other places. (Did Fascists start suicide bombings after the coup d' etat in Spain 1981 failed? Did communist nostalgics start suicide bombings in Russia after the fall of the Communism? And in Serbia? and In Rumania? What about the reaction of the Chinese students after the repression in Tian Anmen? Did they start to bomb China as a "response to the agression"?

Those are all civil war situations, not a foreign invader. It's a strawman. And why are suicide bombing particularly more childish than other bombings?

I don' t really understand the over-reaction. I don' t really understand why your statement can be allowed and accepted without any complain in this forums

Who said that no-one can counter my points?

I really hoped that they could life in peace, but now I really do agree with you, and I want the americans to leave the country. If they want to kill theirselfs, they have my bless. As Helm said once, "let anyone clean their own shit". For me, this countries really deserve their shit.

What about the sh!t that the British  and US left in Iraq by causing and supporting Saddam? Who clears that up?

[only]

I don't think the Suez Crisis is an example of the US using it's military to ensure the wellbeing of it's citizens. 

Sorry, Helm pointed out that I had missed this, and I hand't noticed that part of your message. Sorry, Becky. In Suez, the American military evacuated (some of) their citizens from Egypt. Similarly with many of the other ones I listed: they were mainly or entirely evacuation efforts of US citizens from "troubled" countries. That is an example of the US only protecting its citizens.  While the US didn't get involved in the Egypt vs France/UK dispute, I'd say that was an argument in their favour: all the US military did was ensure the wellbeing of US citizens.

While I understand and agree the general point that US-lead invasions since WWII have done little to protect its citizens (although the Korean War might be arguable), I wouldn't want to be as general as to say that "US foreign military action is all bad since 1945". It's not fair to the US leaders and military who were involved over the past 60 years in doing exactly what Helm implied the US military should be doing: protecting US citizens.

I'm not playing at being a devil's advocate, because the US is not entirely a devil. If you want an analogy, it's like saying that the Volkswagen Beetle was a great car, even though Hitler was a bastard.

Printers would set out the type one character at a time in the days of old, saying to their assistants who passed them the letters: "U and R and M and O and M" etc. However, when they wanted a "&" symbol they would end up saying "S and and and M" which was confusing. So, they used to say instead, "S and, per se, and, and M" and the "and, per se, and" got muddled around into "ampersand"...

Where do broken hearts go?

Now, count how many americans decided to invade Iraq, and divide it by the population of the USA.

What percentage of the vote did Bush get in 2004?

So... we move the line, and accept the people "who agrees with..." in the same level of criminality as the responsible?

You asked: "how many americans decided to invade"... well, ultimately 1: George W. Bush. Which is obviously a pointless question as it simply reflects command structure rather than any morality. I'm not sure what your point is.

Ok... What percentage of Iraqians support insurgency killing people?

As I said, 47% support anti-coalition violence. Presumably less than that support the violence against Iraqi civilians. So a majority are against any violence. And yet you brand them all kids.

Is it OK if I brand all Madridenos as children because ETA blew up Madrid airport and Al Queda blew up a railway station? What about the anti-fascist resistance in Spain and France in the 1930s and 40s?

Now, count how many americans decided to invade Iraq, and divide it by the population of the USA.

What percentage of the vote did Bush get in 2004?

We're like an uninformed adult stepping into a dispute among neighborhood kids without knowing their individual personalities and history.

So Muslims are like kids and the USA like adults... and then Americans wonder why they are percieved as arrogant!

I don't think that was the point she was trying to make, but whatever.

I never said it was. It's casually making the entire middle east out to be a bunch of children that is so annoying.