archimage_a

Most of the pschyopath children would have been weeded out by the time I started teaching them. The original series was ok, you could watch an episode, have it end and be like 'Hmmm, that was ok.' The later series, and the spin offs were mostly terrible. For example: The problem I had with Universe was that it designed a situation that was ridiculous. Space has practically the same premise...there are people on a ship, who, in the sane world, would never ever be allowed to operate independantly from command. In Space what happened... The people who dissented were kicked off the ship, and order was enforced. In Universe what happened... Everyone dissented and everyone remained on the ship. They(The military) gave the science guy free reign over the ship, despite him being a hostile presence to them. They(The science guy) gave the miltary free reign over the ship, despite them being a hostile presence to them. In reality what would have happened is that one side would have taken control and limited access of the other. The military are the most likely candidates for this as the science guy may be pretty incredible, but he can't do a whole huge amount...as shown by his inability to stop them. What would have made it considerably better is if there had actually been some sort of control over the ship, or were able to find a working readout so they could assign work details and such. Furthermore, it would have really helped the story if people had actually got on with tasks, rather than sitting around complaining about the food. The whole thing was a disaster precisely because no one had any sort of leadership quality. When the nutter from Earth took over with the magic crystals the story actually looked like it was going to progress somewhere. But then what happens...Oh yes, the Science guy, who was incapable of controlling the ship in any way, sabortages his plan, and restores the status quo.

Stargate is a western TV show, that means it has moral lessons and a sembalance of educational value(CSI, House...all the other hit US shows that are not about Vampires) Its stories are ok at times, terrible at others... And Reality does not make good Television. If I wanted to watch people sitting around, looking confused, I would become a teacher.

I do have to agree. Watching Dr Who is like watching a debate within the Tavern. There is a lot of shouting, a lot of unneccessary explaination, and showing off their cool pictures/special effects, which have next to nothing to do with the arguement/story. For the majority of stories they just take a mundane reality...say a traffic jam...and blow it up to ridiculous proportions...see planet where all their is is a traffic jam because the doors to the surface as sealed... They then disregard the things that wouldn't work....such as the lack of food, the fact that people would get out of their cars and other people would try to smash their way out... Insert some sort of moral story, aka, nuclear war is bad, and then explore some concepts. But they are running this overarching story that started two series ago (I think) where the Doctor gets tired of respecting the timeline, and so tries to change things...he then goes down the dark path of getting progressively more willing to kill people, carry guns and what not. As such the stories get increasingly less coherant, because the character develops towards this 'dark' version, but still talks as the 'light' version...as such, for the audiance...its like the writers are incapable of holding together a decent character, because he just swings wildly to fit the situation. Also there is the whole thing of him always knowing what is going on, despite there being no way for him to know what is going on... Ultimately, it is progressively going downhill because of the simple truth...DECOMPRESSED STORYLINES ARE A BAD IDEA. A series should have a theme, or a recurring villian...Not a climax...which is what they keep doing...so each episode feels like a letdown, except the climax episode, which feels disappointing because actually the climax was the normal climax you find in another shows. Dr Who has never been about special effects...it is about Story. Unlike Stargate...which has everything it can to distract the audience from the absence a decent story. (Seriously, the Atlantis story horrific, with characters that had too many flaws and no redeeming features. Watched up to 13 and was like 'I really...really can't be bothered.')

Yup, 100% agree with you. Norwegians don't understand the English(or in this case Welsh)

Thanks Earth =) In referenance to the discussion so far.

Justin Bieber generation think a song needs lyrics to be enjoyable. Not suprised really.

Nay. Electric Rock:

Better conversation: Classical Music...Yea or Nay: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX0qN6QEvGg&feature=related

In otherwords...Cowards.

...Its a good thing you were not prime minster of Great Britain...

/join #space4 tavern Going to get food.

*Suddenly becomes very interested in not looking at Rocco* I think it will be down to Ico, though he might very well run his own game, as planned.

A testement to the power of the Norwegians...One man is capable of ruling an entire country, with no assistance...No army, no beaucracy, no civil servants...Controlling three and three quarter million(guestimate for the win) other Norwegians. Truely GODS AMONG MEN. <_< Back in the real world, Norway's traitory was not one person, but rather a group of people...probably a large group of people, agreed with Quisling...or, at the very least, did not feel inclined to do anything about it (See argument on the not being a pill popper, Mather's Statement that it is the Government's responsibility to do everything, for support.) You could also argue that France was entirely innocent of its contribution to the length WW2...And Germany too...Now that I think about it, only Hitler was responsible...Someone should call the Nuremburg Trials and tell them that the other war criminals were innocent. PS. Knew about Quisling :thumbsup:

If Norway hadn't been on the allied side...No, wait, they were on the Axis side. If Norway hadn't been involved in the war, then the war would have ended sooner. Probably. Less British Casualities too, what with the Narvik Campaign.

You can deliver your first born son any time over the next week...Except Wednesday.

If you want to be semantic then I am still technically correct, as Britain gave the technology to America, and paid for the research with grants and whatnot that funded the technology(With the exception of the Jet Engine*) Robert Watson Watt was in a Government sponsored program to built a deathray, using radiowaves (That could kill a sheep at a thousand yards), which he proved was impossible, but that he could detect a sheep using radio waves at 1,000 yards. Thus birthing radar. Alan Turing and the team at Bletchley Park, which developed the first Digital Computers were on the payroll of the British Government, and the computers were Her Majesty's. Convoy System was devised by British Merchant Men and Escort Commanders, all on the payroll of the British Government. The Jet Engine was created by a British Individual in 1928. It was then ignored by the British Government for nearly two decades, and taken by the Germans when the patant expired. So on this point I agree with you. *The Jet Engine was developed by private investors in Britain, and was eventually brought by the British Government. You can, of course, argue, that all countries were giving out grants (This is, infact, a lie. As shown by Britian and the Jet Engine, you didn't get money the moment you presented a paper of a concept...Even if it was airtight and technically brilliant...as Whittle's paper was), and it was only the 'people born in Britian' who developed the technology....and that if they had been born in any other country they would have developed the technology there, instead. You could further argue that without people like John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie(Born in Scotland), Henry Ford and Cornelius Vanderbilt, who were 'Born in America' America would not have been capable of achieving the Industro-Military Complex that was vital to their part in the war. Then, you could also argue that the USSR's contribution was actually purely Stalin. As no one else would have done a crash course of industrialisation. If you went even further you could then argue that without the people working on the production lines in America, those 'Born in America' people, that America would not be able to acheive its part of WW2. And so on and so forth until you get right down to 2,000 generations ago, when Og the German bonked Ug the Brition. Saying Britian is merely the easiest way of conveying the fact that Britian, as a concept...with all the educational systems, class systems, transport, weather, culture, genetics, ect ect, generated the people who went on to produce the technology, which they then gave/sold to Britian, which Britian then gave/sold to America and, to a lesser extend, Russia, in exchange for their part in the war. Although, perhaps drive is the wrong word...I just didn't want to say aspect, because Russia provided sloped armour, and America provided the Sherman Tank...Both technically brilliant inventions. The British, comparitively were hopeless at Tanks, despite pioneering their usage in WW1. However, the British did provide manpower and equipment...Russia provided technology and equipment and American provided technology and manpower, in addition to their 'major' contributions as mentioned earlier. But, because all of this is terribly long winded, and rather unneccessary, I decided to use the word 'Drive' because Britain did spur, and has spurred on the development of new technologies in the past. It is not exactly a coincidence that from 17th century onwards Britian has nominally been at the cutting edge of scientific discovery...From gravity, microscopes, the steam engine, railways and bridges, to penicillin, the tank, the jet engine, the computer and radar. Yes, there has been other countries who have invented others things, and we have recently lost the edge we had...But the fact remains the Britain spurred the development of technology. America was playing with cars and refrigerators(British invention, William Cullen) while Britain was cracking the secrets of radar...and when America was just scratching the surface of metric radar(first generation radar), the British, with their Cavity Magnetron, were moving rapidly past centimetric radar(third generation). Such was the industrial neccessity of the United States, that the British gave the Magnetron to the American, which effectively jumped the American development of radar by 5 years, perhaps 10. If you actually look at the technology of the Second World War in any real detail you will discover that Britain gave away an astonishingly vast amount of technical secrets, mainly because Britain needed America to fight the Russians, should the Russian win against the Facists. Added to that the British naively believed that they could make up the technological ground lost afterwards, and that America would share their technological secrets with them. Of course, then America decided that it was 'unconditional surrender' and pilfered German secrets, who had pilfered French and Russian Secrets, which effectively gave America access to all of the technological brilliance of Europe over the past 5 years, while still retaining their economic supremancy...Best of all, for America, they didn't have to give away any of their money...the powers they had taken/been given the technology were, in actuality, in debt to them. Further America didn't share any of their stolen technology with their allies, reserving Nuclear Weapons, Stealth Technology, Jet Engine Research, and a hoard of medical research data taken from the camps, for themselves and their own companies. It was an impressive coup for America... I could probably keep up this...essay? All night, I have several ideas for the next paragraph already. But I am somewhat doubtful of it being read. Ultimately. Britain played its part, and is deserving of recognition, just as Russia and America are deserving of recognition. There is no way to objectively measure the degree of recognition one country requires over another....They are all interelated, and should be treated as such... We can either accept that, and have our glorious notion of our mother country knocked a little, and find respect for our old allies...or we can dig in our heels and demand that our country deserves absolute and total recognition for winning the war, and find that we treat our allies with contempt. But yeah, British person would say that.

My point is that your argument is valid, but that America not getting involved would have been fundermentally stupid on their part (Something that the American Public were profoundly set on doing). I have no problem in giving America credit for their involvement in the war (That is Resistance who has that problem), I am just pointing out that America didn't go in to the war to save Britian or the rest of the world...They went into the war because if they hadn't they would have been forced to fight on their own, against a much larger enemy. Also pointing out that selling guns and tanks to someone is not the same as fighting by their side, and America should not be given credit for making money out of a war. After the December 1941 I am happy to give America equal credit in fighting the War...They fought, and fought well. You can quibble that Britian provided the technological drive (Computers, Radar, Convoy System, Jet Engines(Search Frank Whittle)), Russia provided the raw manpower and meatgrinder, while America provided the money and equipment... Personally, I would view all three powers as equally neccessary to allied victory.

A) Flying 30,000 troops, without an airfield to start with. B) Flying the resources home again would not be cost effective. C) Even nowadays only 1% of all freight is sent by airplane. D) Without the resources from Macheria/ect...how are they going to build these airplanes?

Ok...So, the USA doesn't embargo Japan. Japan invades Russia. Russia is defeated. Britian is defeated. America sits idle. Germany launches bombing raids on New York in 1946 with their Stealth Long Range Bomber. America, tries to engage its industrial complex, but finds itself assailed by Japanese on the East Coast and Germans on the West Coast. America surrenders. Yup, America was needed for the war. Now, consider this: Germany invades Poland. Britian declines involvement. France follows Britian. Germany invades Russia. Russia is conquered entirely. Britian and Frace sit idle. Japan attacks America at Pearl Harbour, destroying most of their fleet. Germany declares war on America. The Combined German and Japanese Fleets destroy the American fleet, which is now devoid of the Enigma codebooks, the team at Bletchley Park, Radar, Asdic, and the other British inventions. America surrenders. Britian is vital for the war. Ect, ect.

Without a Navy, Japan doesn't invade Manchuria. :mellow: Please don't make me post a map to show why Japan needs a navy to invade Manchuria. Point being that America poked Japan into action. Without America there is no real development on Japan, Japan never seeks to emulate the west. Japan never expands. Never seeks the rich resources of China. Argument is rather holey...I mean, without America then there is a massive chasm where the USA should be, history is bound to be very different. But, basically...Japan had enough 'Rich mineral resources' what it needed was Oil, to power the Navy. Oil which, up until then, had come from America. (Approximately 80%, if memory serves) Once America embargos them they can have all the 'Rich Mineral Resources' you like in China...Without Oil you can't transport them to Japan. ERGO Japan signs the non-aggression pact with Russia (Yes they could have invaded...it would have got them exactly nowhere. Since Siberia contains no Oil(Or Oil that was known about and exploitable in 9 months...the point when Japan would have run out of Oil).). Japan rushes into war with America, hoping to destroy their fleet in a sneak attack. They then rapidly took control of Southern Asia...largely controlled by France, Britain and the Dutch...All of which, with the exception of the British Indians, had been throughly drained by the 2 years earlier. They then charged into the Dutch East Indies...with the vast Oil Fields, and captured them to survive. Invading Russia fufilled no objective, since Russia clearly was not going to invade them.

Chinese Army: 2.85 million http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army You may spend: 687,105,000,000 = USA 114,300,000,000 = China On arming your soliders, special upgrades to ships, aircraft...ect. Provided they take less than 2 months to complete. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures You may deploy conscripts of: 618,588,627 = China 119,822,084 = America http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_armed_forces Deploying vast numbers of conscripts will result in attrition, revolt...ect, ect... China may conscript 0.7% before attrition and such. America may conscript 0.3% before attrition and such. Attrition/Desertion after that point is between 1 and 20% a day. Between 10,000 and 1,000,000 people revolt each million you go over your 0.7 and 0.3 limits. Revolts are counted against you in the final outcome, but doesn't feature in game. Conscripted soliders must be deployed before the game starts to actually be used in game, as soliders. Non-deployed soliders may be recruited at will, and become active after 1 and 6 days, for the purposes of defence only. After your 0.7 and 0.3%, respectively, the troops are counted as being unarmed.

There was no reason to turn on Russia. Russia had no Oil in Sibera. Without the United States Japan would have never developed a large fleet...So the argument there is nullified. Glorified Arms Dealer... Lining your pockets turns you into mercenaries...

Japan had no reason to invade Russia, hence why they signed a non-aggression pact. Which freed up lots of Siberian troops for action on the Eastern Front(Or from their perspective...the Western Front) The only thing the Japanese were interested in, at the time, was the Dutch Oil Supplies, because America had embargoed them.

Ok. No one was interested, but anyway. Idea is thus: You are the General Staff for your respective countries...USA and China. This is the first two weeks of the war, only. Nuclear weapons have been denied by the President/Premier, and bioweapons/other superweapons are only authorised as a last resort. Arguments/Army Sizes are to be posted on thread, PMs will be posted on the thread, with as much proof as possible to support them. Anything not posted will not be considered during the game. Your army/navy/airforce will have 2 months to prepare for this war. Game will take place this wednesday OR next wednesday, on IRC. You will command your all of your troops as a team. If no one is interested then this will die peaceful.

Crafty Americans... getting involved while still being offically neutral. Oh wait...