Ginger_Warrior

If you honestly believe military actions will stop the Hamas rocket attacks, then you're a bigger fool than I had imagined. The war has made another generation of Palestinians willing to sign themselves up, it's made Hamas' political position stronger in Palestine, and the rocket attacks don't take a large amount of funding to operate anyway. This war is doing nothing to stop the smuggling of goods into the Gaza Strip. Indeed, conversely, it could be argued the tunnels' creations was caused by the blockade on the Gaza Strip. Has the Israeli government done anything to address this? Nope. It would rather take the hardline response in order to appeal itself to the majority of Israelis, because war against an enemy boosts popularity (Bush + Iraq, Thatcher + Falklands, to name but two). Well, if you don't care about the IDF killing Palestinian civilians, why should we care about Hamas launching rocket attacks on Israeli civilians?

'Shooting your plane down in flames' is a figure of speech, meaning I "shot down" your point. You made the question sound rhetorical, so I merely reminded you there are those of us who are quite happy only having guns in the hands of the police. Seriously, I don't actually believe you can take out an F-15 with a 9mm pistol. :| As far as Fascism is concerned, well, let's look at Nazi Germany. The Nazis tried two routes to power. The first they tried was a military coup, the Munich Putsch. Long story short, it failed. The Nazis then chose a different path - democracy. You see, you have to understand that fascism is not necessarily a party seizing control over a country like a parasite, and then using the country's workforce for its own evil ambitions. More often than not in history, fascists are helped into power. In Germany, anti-Semitism was incredibly high after the Treaty of Versailles, and the perception that the Jews had sold Germany short in the negotiations, and thus, that they were traitors. The Wall Street Crash caused hyperinflation, causing massive difficulty for most Germans Can't you see it? Hard as it is for us to accept such a sophisticated country like Germany did, the Germans wanted a totalitarian despot; a strong man whom they could look to to guide them out of Germany's woes, reverse twenty years of injustice, and cleanse German society from the 'November criminals' that had betrayed the country. Guns didn't put the Nazis in charge. The German people did. If you want to stop fascism, listen to the people's grievances so they don't get disillusioned with democracy in the first place.

Anything that goes down well with teenage girls, Kelly Clarkson's there. *GW hides the Kelly Clarkson album*

Yes. Now excuse me while I shoot your plane down in flames. Good luck doing that while you're locked away in labour camp. Maybe if the people had had guns they would have been able to fight off the totalitarian fascist force opposing them. I've news for you: Much as I have a problem with America (the country, not the land), it's nowhere near fascism. In fact, as nations come, it's actually quite free. What it boils down for me is a simple choice: Do I panic about how they're out to get me, so I'd better arm myself quick for the impending civil war; or do I trust that my taxpayers' money goes to properly train the police on correct safety procedures and vetting (most of whom don't usually carry guns anyway)? I choose the latter, and I get on with my life.

Oddly enough, I'm sitting like a proper bloke now. Must be the GH controller I'm wearing. :P

Yes. Now excuse me while I shoot your plane down in flames.

I think it's topic worthy, it's just a bad example to dwell on. I think we had a topic about the Lisbon Treaty a while back but it's been a while since it or the EU's been touched on. At the end of the day, the Express, the Mail, The Tories and the various other far-right parties have to wake up to the fact Britain is a tiny, tiny island; a very dense drop in an incredibly large ocean. We are never going to be an autarkic nation, and we will have to use foreign resources in order to keep our economy and our way of life going. I've many problems with the EU. The fact it's protectionist, the fact it supports free market capitalism to the point of idiocy, the fact it appears to push its weight around unfairly and the fact it doesn't necessarily support Britain's best interests. But you win some, you lose some when it comes to foreign negotiations. At least it keeps Europe together, and keeps it trading so peace is in all members' best interests. It's either the EU which grants us economic stability, a useless quasi-League of Nations (and don't we all know how badly that project failed), or nothing. I'd rather be in an organisation where my voice is represented on a global scale so Europe can actually have some sort of influence.

Blimey, you mean there was nothing on Princess Diana in the Express today? Must be big news. :roll:

I think you're right. I'll find something: EDIT: Found it. In any case, let's avoid name calling when we're talking about diseases.

I sit cross legged. Like a woman in a skirt/dress. Sometimes I sit on my right foot and leave my left foot on the floor too. Kinda comfy, except it wrecks your knees afterwards.

I don't get it. It's like someone just dreamt up some random story and put it on paper thinking it was insta-lulz. It doesn't have a punchline, or wit, or irony, or anything. It's a bit like 50 cent and song writing, know what I mean?

I'm all for light-hearted threads but... What. The. Hell?

You're not shrinking the number of hours children are learning for a week, you're just rearranging them. They're still gonna be at work the same number of hours, just as Goddess has pointed out with the "saving money on energy" point. Teachers would still therefore get the same wage, would they not? Again, I'm not seeing how that's saving money.

Lostprophets - Can't Catch Tomorrow (Good Shoes Won't Save You This Time) I remember hearing this live. The crowd went wild with energy.

I'd stay around here. Trust me. You ain't going anywhere with an attitude like that.

......Ok. Fine. I admit it. I hate waking up, my mom rolls me off the edge on my bed and empties a half cup of water on my face, and maybe I wake up. I've always been like that, I react different when I'm asleep then when I'm awake. And you think this predicament would be better if you worked harder for two hours a day? You've yet to learn of the Work-Life balance, my young padawan. What? Who said anything about teachers being laid off? ...and? I'm sorry to grill, but I'm not seeing any relevant points here. It's like the thread a few weeks ago about sleeping patterns. Fine, you can have your idea, and hey, it might be a good one, but it doesn't fit into reality. Most people work from 9-5, five days a week where possible. You're forcing parents to hire a childminder for a day because parents still need to work for a living - I'm not seeing how that's saving anyone money.

Third place in the Olympics, second in the Paras, Manchester United and Chelsea ruling the football world, Mark Cavendish at the Tour de France, Andy Murray, Lewis Hamilton... Yeah Britain's doing badly. Apart from cricket, obviously. We're doing fan-bloody-tastic there.

I started on medium in GH2. Given you don't have to move your hand and the timing's pretty simple, it practically meant "easy". Unlike, DD, I'm no expert on this game though. I'm doing alright I guess. Given a year ago I couldn't even use the orange fret because I wouldn't move my left hand, and now I've got comfortable with moving the index finger between red and green. The thing is, I'm trying really hard to do My Name Is Jonas, and I can do the HOs and POs easy, but I can't keep it up. Half way through the song, my hand goes dead through exhaustion. It's bloody frustrating! :wall:

Have you tried, like, working or something? Even if it's only for a couple of hours a week, working's proven to have a therapeutic effect on the mind. Makes the person feel like they're worth something, that they have something to contribute to others and it gives them an identity, which in turn inspires pride.

He said it. Except I wait until a couple of days, even less. I know I should have been more motivated but... it isn't what I wanted to do when I was 16-18. Life > Education, as far as I'm concerned.

So... you destroy even more of a child's free time during four days, and leave them with nothing to do on the other while their parents have to go to work and possibly pay through the nose for childcare? Something's telling me this is a bad idea.

If you believe Communism is systemically flawed, care to explain how? Yet to... the entire capitalist world is empirical evidence. The United States became a world power thanks to capitalism (and a war or two). The US became the world's main power for several reasons, not just capitalism. To name but a few: 1) The decline of the UK, Germany and France as world powers. Also, the US's role in Spain's waning influence over the Caribbean. 2) Its vast military. The US spends much more than most not only on its own military, but its allies (Israel at the moment, for example). 3) The fact it's the leader of the capitalist world. 4) Geographically, America has an abundance of resources and space to inhabit with industry and commerce. This is what people in the western world, particularly America, fail to understand about capitalism and trade. America is a massive consumer without really having a fantastic amount of exporters. In order to balance the trade deficit, America 'sucks in' capital from the rest of the world. This recession, as much as anything, proves the world doesn't have enough capital to sustain America's level of consumption and have every nation on Earth running under capitalism. Claiming China is prospering for the same reason as America is also a fallacy. China doesn't have record levels of debt because its economy is not focused around the financial market. The Chinese are far more cautious with their money and generally speaking only buy what they can afford (public debt as a % of GDP: China 18.40; USA 60.80). Contrary to the USA, they are also massive exporters to balance their trade deficit. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If you're going to proclaim "I understand and support Capitalism", at least understand how it works beyond a blitz basic description like 'free market'. There were more reasons than that. Economically, Britain wasn't powerful enough. Britain could not match the Germans for industrial output, France looked like falling, naval conveys were under severe threat from U-boats, and Britain could only feed itself for a pathetic 120 days a year. Well, for one, Churchill was a Conservative. Why would he like communism? Then there was also war weariness. People didn't want to live like that any more. Secondly, the Labour Party swept to power after the war and introduced the NHS. Rationing continued after the war. The railways were developed as they were nationalised. The 'Homes for Heroes' scheme was funded by the Government to improve the living conditions for people in the working classes. Britain didn't embrace communism with open arms, but some traits of it certainly stayed after the war. Utopianism has it's economic advantages: everyone's happy and countries see record growth. Except that's an economic advantage you see on paper rather than in the real world. Referring to your own ideal as the only one that pertains to reality, whilst dismissing all else as "it doesn't work" strikes me as bad arguing etiquette.

1) I think it's worth mentioning at this point that while the majority of people will participate in completely consensual sex, there are people, and we're not talking about a tiny minority here, who use sex as a weapon to control others. For example, if a partner's not having sex with someone, they're not showing enough "commitment". If someone's done a favour for somebody else, that person needs to "pay them back". If you can get a woman drunk and she comes home with you, that apparently equates to consent. If an underaged girl doesn't want to have sex with an older man, she clearly isn't "ready" for the relationship and so they have to break up. Only this week, KidScape (a bad name for this forum, I agree) released a warning over 'sexual bullying' in schools. Around a quarter of teenage girls admit being pressurised into engaging in sexual activities; worst of all, some teenage boys think there's nothing wrong with that. I realise this wasn't what you were trying to say, but the idea that sex is a totally lovely, innocuous process in all cases is laughable. 2) As mentioned before, sex can be a bad thing. Even without talking about the obvious; rape, paedophilia, exploitation, excessive sexual encounters can put a strain on a relationship. It depends on the people involved when determining the point at which sex becomes excessive, but doing sex to excess certainly is a 'bad' thing for most people.

Well, Australia's media must be begging for some news. Why else would they turn to our affairs to broadcast? Not much goes on in Australia except sports... and that was a sore topic until this morning. :P *Puts up flame shield*

The same could be said about Communism, could it not? And before you start with "empirical evidence" (which you've yet to present), there are examples of Communism actually working in countries, albeit brutally. It could be argued the USSR would not have survived the Nazis' offensive on Moscow and Stalingrad had collectivisation and the FYPs not come before. Britain, to all intents and purposes effectively was a Communist regime during WWII, thanks to the Emergency Powers Act, and yet despite factories being bombed and having their food rationed, production per worker rose by 10%. I think it would be worth clarifying at this point exactly what 'work' means. Each system has its economical advantages and disadvantages, there's no 'Model X is better than Model Y' answer here.