Ginger_Warrior

Just tell him how you feel and stop spending so much time with him. If he understands, he'll change, or at least try to. I know you don't wanna do this, but it's either now while things are reletively calm, or later when you wanna rip his head off. Which one do you think will upset him less?

Just say no. I got to a college where about 90% of students get wasted at least one a week. They always look at me strangely after they've asked me, "What do you drink?", and I've turned round and said, "I don't drink". they've still respected my decision to make that judgement though, which actually does mean a lot. Shows they ain't doing it just to look good! It doesn't matter whether it's drink, drugs, sex or anything. If they're not gonna respect your decision to say 'no', then frankly, I wouldn't really trust them to be around you when you do try it for the firt time and dip your toes in the water. Just keep saying 'no' and don't give in. Moment you give in is the moment he feels like if he just nags enough he'll be able to manipulate you.

No confirmation this will be avaliable online though, so wouldn't hold your horses on that one... :(

Ha, you should send that to your (a) senator. Seriously, we cant withdraw lest the area falls into chaos and civil war. It's our fault. Agreed. You have two options: a) Stay in Iraq permanently to try and head off the sectarian violence. And it would be a permanent solution since as the reason they're fighting in the first place is because of your presence. B) Pull out of Iraq, and allow whatever happens to happen. If that involves Iraq falling into a civil war and/or revolution, then that's what happens. TBH, in the long-term, allowing Iraq to undergo such a process might actually solve things in the long-run. Although I do agree spending money on a war which is against the opinion of the majority of people in your own country just strike me as political suicide and makes for little sense, I don't agree with the comment about losing political bondages will result in the war being over in a quick fix.

DISCLAIMER: Read the warning in my signature. These views are not representative of Tip.It in anyway! Well, I don't see why asking people on the Internet or in the Real Life would make any real difference. In fact, it's actually probably better due to the fact you get a much wider demographic... 1. Why did America invade Afghanistan in 2002? Following the unprecedented attacks on the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and the attempted attack on the White House (or Camp David, the plane was shot down en route anyway) on 9/11, George Bush declared his War on Terror. His first phase of this was the destruction of the Taliban, who mostly resided in Afghanistan. Hence the invasion. 2. Why did America invade Iraq in 2003? Oil... (Joking) The removal of weapons of mass destruction, the removal of an evil tyrant, to enforce their pro-Democratic principles on the rest of the world and to remove any sort of terrorist breeding grounds within and around Iraq. Of course, if I was to be more cynical, I'd actually say the only reason they invaded Iraq was to create a power in the Middle-East that would effectively do the USA's dirty work by keeping Iran and Palestine under control. 3. Who is the U.S. military fighting in Iraq today? Good question. Who are they fighting? I will call them a mixture Islamic fundamentalists and aggresive resistors to the occupation by the US army. Labelling them 'insurgents' as the US army does seems a tad bit unfair, considering it's actually their country and they were there long before any US marine got there. 4. Who is Osama Bin Laden? The charismatic leader of Al-Queda, no less, who seems to outwit the Americans consistantly despite the lack of any equipment (apart from a amcorder). An Islamic fundamentalist who preaches Jihad against the Western World, a call which is actually rejected by most Muslims on the grounds that his reasoning isn't a just reason for the declaration of Jihad as according the Qu'ran. Releases a video now and then just to make sure the Western World knows he's alive and kicking. Bit like David Cameron really in that sense... Age: 17 Do you watch a lot of news: I watch a lot more than most people my age, but I'd hardly describe it as 'a lot'. At least once a day and if I'm really bored or if there's a major news story, I might stick BBC News 24 on. I think the McCann case when Kate got questioned was the last time I did that...

How exactly would that work?

Look, I don't drink either and not even I would say that, even though I've watched people very close to me literally drink themselves to death. Drinking with the sole purpose of getting absolutely wasted and so you don't remember anything and you can let yourself go and be happy - that's idiotic in my opinion. Alcohol itself isn't.

Looks kinda pathetic actually. I mean, it doesn't look particularly accurate and there seems to be no way of controlling its direction. So all you gotta do really is stand behind it...

The vast majority of Tip.It lives in either the UK or America. There will inevitably times where staff numbers will be lower than they are at other times. With fairness, also, is it really necessary that Crewbies or Items Researchers are on at all time zones?

If you ever played animal crossing you would actually like that level and would like that the dog comes out and sings every sunday and that the mole lectures on and on and then puts you to sleep. Like me Yeah but the thing is, after playing RS, you get kinda used to just logging off the game and having your progress auto-saved. The amount of times I just switched off Animal Crossing without saving... and had to listen to that mole! #-o

That's a completely false statistic. That's actually what was said in a video published during the war by the army. I'm not saying I agree with the facts it told me, in fact I highly doubt it could destory the world. However, the point remains I don't like nuclear power for its mass destructive capability. Where in that post did I actually refer to using biofuels as an alternative supply of fuel, yet alone claim you could power an entire country on it?

I'm going to say 'no', and my reasons have already mentioned so I won't bother making myself sound repetitive. However, I'm not of the belief Off-Topic = a debate section. There have been many threads, threads which personally don't interest me in the slightest, about amusing local issues, such as this one. These threads don't offer much stimulus for a 'debate', as opposed to an informal chat. Threads such as this one however are much more suitable to be classed as a 'debate'. There's a clear difference between the two, so saying OT would be empty with such a sub-forum is a view I personally don't agree with. However, I still don't feel the sub-forum actually merits its existance, so I'm still saying 'no', but I do appreciate there is a wider range of threads in OT than just debates.

Option D) You don't drink alcohol, and so therefore wouldn't actually know. :wink:

Where do people get this idea that IP bans actually stop people from doing anything on the Internet? I see it on social networking sites like Bebo too... one person says one bad thing and everyone's calling for an IP ban, and then wonders why it doesn't stop them. It's really not that hard to change an IP address. And for the reasons mentioned by mario_sunny it's also impractical. The fact is there are no more "mass bans". Rule breaking has gotten so bad in RS that figures worthy of such a title are now a regular occurance.

I personally don't like this as opposed to just making another image with the correct dimensions, but look for a JPEG resizer program.

I've suddenly been turned off SSBB after hearing that stupid mole will pop and start wittering on and on. :-X Way to spoil the fun Nintendo! -.- I think I'll be turning off that trophy if it allows me to somehow...

Fine, llcoolguy. I'm no supporter of nuclear technology, not after I heard that just one nuclear submarine (and this is during WWII, surely only God knows what this would be like now) has enough energy inside it to completely destroy the planet and rip it asunder. I'm all for installing windfarms and other renewable sources of energy. But whenever a council does, we get a load of people protesting 'coz it "spoils the view". Well, having the grassy hill turn into a baron wasteland seems much more of a threat of "spoiling the view" than some windmill ever would, but that's irrelevant. You have to turn around to these people, and tell them that frankly it's the only way. In a democratic system, for obvious reasons, that can be very hard. If you were, for example, Gordon Brown now, on a wave of popular support, would you feel comfortable making such a devastating message? Then there's also tax. For starters, tax would have to go up to match the price of such renewable energy plants. No government in their right minds would get into power on that manifesto. Then people would whine because there's better things to spend the money on, such as the NHS or inland security, or pensions etc.. You see my point It's very well condoning and supporting renewable energy sources, but public attitude is actualyl very much against them. you have to change that attitude if you're ever going to change anything. Or, of course, the alternative is nuclear. Still not popular, but a lot more feasable than turning round to literally millions of people an saying, "We're gonna increase your tax just to give you clean power. It's the same power as the power you've been getting for the last 150 years, but we'll still make you pay more for it".

Not neccesarily, whats easier, changing millions of american's attitude, or simpley say "Buy this car that runs on water instead". I'm pretty sure we have such technology.. however the oil companies are making far to much profit. Yes, that solves one aspect of it though. In truth, there's far more things in our lifestyle that contribute to climate change than just vehicles alone, especially since now catalytic convertors are a legal requirement on all newly produced vehicles. Things like the source of power we use (fossil fuels), industrial waste, our own energy consumption - all these have to be considered as well. Eh? :?

Like I said, you have to change the whole of the developed world's attitude, not just a few people's. And it's good you do get dropped off, but let's face it there's millions who don't. I wouldn't suggest walking 5 miles by foot and back each day lol! But the times in which you can go, "it's my car, I'll do what I want with it" are fast coming to a close as more pressure mounts. To tackle global warming, you have to actually turn round to people and say that nothing's going to be solved while we still continue to live the lifestyle we live. As part of that change in lifestyle, people will have to give up their liberty in just using car to get them wherever and whenever the feel like it. I'm just saying that is the only way things are ever going to change for the better.

But most factories produce more ozone as pollution. Ozone is much more buoyant and lighter than chlorofluorocarbons. We should be replenishing the ozone layer faster than we're destroying it. Ahh... you're right they do produce ozone, but this ozone doesn't actually get off the ground much, let alone into the atmosphere, and low level ozone is a very bad thing indeed. To tackle climate change, you have to change attitudes not only in America, which I feel has been slightly made a scapegoat in all of this, but the entire developed world. You gotta stop the idiots who drive all of those long four miles to work on their own in car when public tranport, or even cycling, suffices their needs perfectly. Or the ones that drive two minutes up the road to the supermarket 'coz they can't be bothered carrying their bags home. It's only by making people (and it has to be said, it's the majority of people) think about the consequences of their actions things will ever be solved. Thus, anything the UN can do would be for the most part useless, unless that message is backed up by local authorites. So everyone who uses a car they bought and paid for are idiots for using it to drive themselfs, even if it is short distances? Those that accept global warming and climate change is due to human activity, and then go and do such things whilst still saying, "Oh, something should be done about it", are, frankly, being hypocrites. The fact they paid for that car is regardless and irrelevant - there is still no actual need to use that car and contribute to the problem. That is the attitude I'm talking about. When I said 'idiots', I'm referring to people who use excuses like "It's four miles away and I have to walk for public transport" as a justification. Because it's not a justification at all. Maybe if their work was ten or fifteen miles away, I'd understand, but if it's such a short distance I really see no need.

But most factories produce more ozone as pollution. Ozone is much more buoyant and lighter than chlorofluorocarbons. We should be replenishing the ozone layer faster than we're destroying it. Ahh... you're right they do produce ozone, but this ozone doesn't actually get off the ground much, let alone into the atmosphere, and low level ozone is a very bad thing indeed. To tackle climate change, you have to change attitudes not only in America, which I feel has been slightly made a scapegoat in all of this, but the entire developed world. You gotta stop the idiots who drive all of those long four miles to work on their own in car when public tranport, or even cycling, suffices their needs perfectly. Or the ones that drive two minutes up the road to the supermarket 'coz they can't be bothered carrying their bags home. It's only by making people (and it has to be said, it's the majority of people) think about the consequences of their actions things will ever be solved. Thus, anything the UN can do would be for the most part useless, unless that message is backed up by local authorites.

you will be happy to know your not Seconded. I always read the trophies. Especially the ones that I didn't know about (Japan Release Only Games) Me three. That's about as far as my knowledge of literature will reach to before I get bored. :P

What is, then? People doing it in the first place. :) IMO, there's usually enough mods online to deal with problems in a timely fashion, especially considering it is a voluntary role. No need for a paniced increase in mods just because one time zone happens to have less mods serving it than the others.

Yey trophies! Collecting the trophies was half the fun on SSBM! :P

Their excuse isn't actually translating. When the Wiis weren't getting on the shelves in time for Xmas last year, their excuse was a problem in that canal that runs through Saudi Arabia (Sluice Canal or something like that). I don't understand why they don't build a factory and just submit the data over the Internet personally... or maybe it'd get hacked on the way or something? But anyways, that's their official line. Above all else, if it is translating, why can't the UK just have the American version with a few tweeked words here and there and then the rest of Europe can have a later release date, or they can import it through NoE if they speak English? It's the same language, only things like 'noob' don't appear in the EU versions. Take it from a VIP 24:7 member on Nintendo of Europe's website... Nintendo have always treated Europe second-rate, except for when we got the DS first.