Rebdragon

Amazing. Does bringing up concepts that have been used before make them less true? No, but bringing up points that have failed more times and worse than the Mongols did against Japan does tend to make them appear less noteworthy. And my point is that it's worthless for everything but a healthy dose of stress relief and full-hearty fun. Why do you feel a need to justify your playing beyond relaxation? Fun and relaxation are good for you, for crying out loud! No, no, the only reason this post would have a purpose is if it was meant to achieve the goal of making Runescape seem useful for real life, which it fails at. If it was not, this thread would serve no purpose other than being random and spammish. If you aren't trying to justify Runescape to at least a marginal degree, what are you doing? I mean, if you had valid points, maybe I'd get what you're saying, but you're suggesting that 'Scapers have a mathematics capacity lower than that of a six year old, as well as an understanding of economics lower than that of a four year old in order that your points be even slightly valid (well, except the last one, which is quite terrifyingly off). Your arguments just blatantly were useless all around, as if you were desperately searching for a reason to play the game fourteen hours a day. Not that you are, but I can't help but notice that your points do seem slightly desperate and stretched, to the point of tearing. Then what is it? I honestly can't think of any other options. So yes, I do categorize your post as a hackneyed article that is made in defense of Runescape.

Still waiting for m4tty to say, "Only in America!"

Don't slouch, keep upright posture, and as stated, look into people's eyes. You'll have a much greater aura of self-confidence around you just from the way you walk, so if you tend to look down when you walk, or do not have any swagger in your gait at all, work on your posture and get a little swagger in yur step :P .

But doesn't that statement, in a way, support our argument as well? We're arguing that they weren't idiots, so they gave up after the use of the atomic bombs. We're still arguing that the Japanese were persistent, which, like you said, is portrayed by how hard they fought and the mindset much of the culture and race held. But why is it that you think an enemy having a weapon that can destroy a major city in an instant wouldn't be the final straw of their withdrawl, if you think they aren't idiots? And yes, it's ludicrous to say that just because some Japanese soldiers "kamikazed" that they'd fight to the last man, but the idea of the kamikaze tactic portrays a piece of the Japanese elitist persona. As I stated, they had no desire to attack on American soil, just to control all of East and Southeast Asia, to complete their empire. That's how their mindset worked/s- being the greatest race on the planet, they deserve to have a large, expansive empire, with all other nations and people as their slaves (just look up some of the stuff the Japanese did to other Asians while conquering East Asia... ack). Sorry if I'm not responding to every little point in your posts, but I don't have to time nor desire to spend three hours of my day debating this. Guess I'm lazy, probably won't come anywhere close to finishing this debate, oh well. yomom and assassin, just ignore this post please. We know that he's basically assuming you're wrong in his post, so there's no point in arguing with him, as he's skipping past the debate and going off onto another point. Heck, he even reiterated a point that assassin already owned, so we can just move on past this, please. As I stated in a previous post, if America was in the same position that the Japanese were at the time, yes, I would say that the bombing was justified still. As for your comment on the Middle East Alansson, the US's merely supporting governments there against terrorist actions. Stopping terrorism is no reason for a terrorist attack to be justified, unless you support terrorism, but that's a ten page argument for another thread.

Epic phail. Wow, I love hearing this argument more and more every time it's used. "Well, at least we're not out drinking and getting high, so Runescape must be good for me!" Trust me, if you're the kind of guy who'd sit as his computer all day and enjoy it, you're probably not the partying/drinking/drug abusing type. It's one's personality, not the game. And now students, we begin our first meeting of Denial 101 class: Well duh, it's Spongebob. He is the modern Buddha. [but for that matter, this is about Runescape, not TIF :-$ .] Two year old concept. If you're proud that you get supply and demand, dear god, go find something else to be proud of, please. And for that matter, don't act like you understand economics just because you get "demand up, price up, supply up, price down". Find that way too much on these forums, and it just gets frikkin' annoying. Ethics? No. Ability to click for hours on end in the dark corner of your abode? Check-o-mundo. Hehe. Hahaha. ... Not only is that first grade math, but it's math generally done on a calculator anyways, and ya'll know it. It's either easy enough that you can figure it out in half a second, or you pull out the calculator application. Math? No check please. You didn't plagiarize these arguments from another "Runescape is good for you" thread, right? Heard these all before >_>. Desperation move people. A game that has absolutely no connection to any location in the history of man is not a "culture- check". It vaguely resembles medieval times, but even then you gain no information about the era than you would already know from common sense anyways. It's a fantasy game. Play it for the fantasy and escapism, and don't try and act like it imitates or connects to anything in real life. Want ancient legends and fables? Pick up a book at Barnes&Noble on Greek Mythology instead of playing Runescape, you'll actually learn something. Indeed. For crying out loud, just play the game for fun, you don't need to justify it and act like it actually helps you in life. These "arguments" have all been used before, and they've failed miserably every time. Seriously, just play the damn game.

Okay, I was writing a response to this, but it was taking too long, so rather than make this debate waste dozens of hours of both of our lives, let's just focus it: In searching through the sources you referenced (especially Wikipedia, which I scowered through looking for your arguments), I could not find one example of the Japanese desiring (as at least a majority) to end the war before the bombings. Any example of desire to end the war that I did find came after the bombings, including this statement:

Hope you don't mind that I mentioned you both? And you. What? Mind? Just mentioning me felt like enough of a compliment to keep me running for another month without one :P :mrgreen: .

:lol: Yah Lionheart, this is going down in history.

That in comparing the near-equivalent levels of "skinnyness" and "fatness", being skinny wins, even when you get to the most extreme cases on both sides of the spectrum. Obviously both extreme ends are a terrible way for one to live, any large enough divergence from average weight is a bad thing (I'd say that a lot of you guys need to put on a few pounds, in my own opinion, and of course you can even with a fast metabolism), but being barely underweight is better than being barely overweight, in the same way that being very overweight is worse than being very underweight, even if both can be extremely detrimental to one's health.

Now, how many posts like this are there on this thread? :-w :-k God guys, just request one, don't be so roundabout about it :P .

That's about the equivalent of saying that Muslim extremists committing acts of terror proves that all religion is evil. Yes, sorry, brought religion into the thread, just trying to prove a point here, move along.

EAT COOKIES. Destroying stuff in video games also calms me down. So eat some cookies while you blow up stuff. That should work.

If America had no chance of defeating the Japanese, yet was still instisted to continue the war pointlessly, yes, Japan would be justified in stopping the Americans from continuing the war by dropping a bomb on two cities. But that's not how the situation was, so your argument using that rhetorical device would shed little light on the issue.

Breaking Benjamin - Diary of Jane

Eh, medium level I suppose, hard to describe it. My little brother likes it so quiet that he can hear it, but to me I can barely hear it at all. He doesn't like to bother people, so he subconsciously puts any sound fairly quiet. Then, again, every time I get into "my" car and turn on the radio, I jump three feet in my chair thanks to the fact that my sisters puts it on practically max volume. How she can like listening to rap (yes, she's a white sixteen year old girl who listens to rap, ack), or any music for that matter, at such a high volume is beyond me. So ya, moderate volume I suppose. I don't drown out everything (usually just close the door for that), but I keep it loud enough to enjoy it.

Ima go out on a limb and say it's the missing Archon. Just crazy enough to be true. . An Archon wouldn't immediately recognize Ash, or even recognize him at all for that matter, especially with the misfile situation. Still going on old friend, or someone from Ash's past that distinctly remembers her/him, but he doesn't remember her quite as well. Either way, it's an interesting plot twist (and hopefully not a waste of a new character, we've got plenty as is), so I'm still excited about what tomorrow's comic is going to be. Still waiting for Em and Ash to talk about Emily's opinion about not undoing the misfile though.

If you check my posts, I never say that the bombing was justified because it was less brutal than the Japanese methods. I was just making a point of the fact of using pathos by describing the, mind you, instantaneous deaths as an argument is far inferior to other methods of arguing that the bombs were not justified. The Japanese were not prepared to surrender, as has been stated multiple times. The entire Ego of the Japanese race would not permit it, as is obvious by their will through kamikaze techniques to kill themselves if it meant their enemy would die. Casualties were estimated to be at at least 2 million US soldiers if a direct attack was to be made on Japanese land, and magnitudes worse for the Japanese themselves. Lesser of two evils. As a final point, the Japanese were shown time and time again to be unafraid of death on high magnitudes. Take the firestorms in Dresden and in Tokyo, in the year before the two atomic bombings. These storms of fire raged through the city, soaring thousands of feet into the air, devouring the buildings of Tokyo, which had a relatively high concentration of wood and paper within them. The firestorm in Tokyo killed well over one-hundred thousand people, but did the Japanese back down? Hell no. They were ready to kill the American basterds, even if it meant the near collapse of their entire empire. It was not until the bombs were dropped- a strange new device capable of killing tens of thousands (happy mad? :? ) in the blink of an eye- that the Americans were able to finally convince the Japanese that there was no way in Hell they were going to win. Again, lesser of two evils. I'm not arguing that it was ethical, I'm merely arguing that it was needed in order to preserve as much life as possible during WWII. Oh, and mad, they didn't only do it to soldiers. Any gaijin they could find, they'd willingly torture. Such a xenophobic race, it's almost sad. Maybe the imperialistic, racially motivated, kamikaze government would never have surrendered but thats not to say everybody in Japan thought the same way. They weren't all brainwashed, there would have been an ousting of the government, with Germany defeated most of the Japanese people probably realised they were defeated. Heck no. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The Japense are an elitist racist, placing themselves above all other races, then and now. Yes, of course there were people among those who died that wished Japan would surrender. That is beyond tragic. But, nonetheless, the bombing ended the war, and saved magnitudes more people than the bombings killed. It was a travesty, but it saved many lives. Guna have to say it again, it was the lesser of two evils, a tragedy, but less of a tragedy than if the attack had not been implemented.

People die every day. Their skin may not melt, their eyes may not pop out, but death is part of life. So you wouldn't mind dying that way? Pfft, better than dying to the Japanese. The Japanese used the most sick minded methods of torturing foreign prisoners, and often not to get information, but just for fun. For example, just so you can get some perspective, they had a torture technique for male prisoners where they stuck a glass tube up their... rod, and after inserting it deep within the vas deferans (sp?), they snapped and shattered while it was still inside. Compared to dying instantly from a bomb, I think I'd rather be the Japanese person between the two situations. Don't talk morality of killing vs. morality of killing when you go Japan vs. America, it doesn't work. As has been said, all the deaths of the war were tragic, but using pathos as your only argument against the bombing, and ignoring logic and forsight, is not a proper way to argue the matter. Choosing the bomb was choosing the lesser of two evils. There was little choice between killing a couple thousand instantly, or letting the war drag on and allow the death of possibly millions more.

Im sorry but I think this would take longer to recover from Im sorry that is slightly disturbing but that is the reality of skinny. I'd post the obvious, easy, perfect response to that, but I'm sure that I'd burn out the eyes of most Tip.iters if I posted the picture response. So, I'll just say- at least she can still move and get outta bed.

I won't say this is immoral or twisted, just extremely societally incorrect.

Any historian with half a brain understands that the death toll of the war would have been much higher if we had not dropped the bombs. Yes, the US killed thousands, but it took only two bombs to force a surrender, with no casualties other than those within the two cities. If the US had fought out the war without the two bombs, head-to-head combat would have forced the death toll far higher, especially if the Japense somehow got the war to American ground, or vice versa. Those two bombs ended the war, swiftly. There is little debate as to whether it was the right choice; Hell, the CHURCH agrees it was the right choice, and that organization has the largest pack of pro-life nutjobs on the planet. The current Japanese government itself agrees that it was necessary at the time for America to drop the bombs to end the war. And yomom, stop talking like war is supposed to be perfectly ethical in all its parts. That's not possible, okay? As for your comment on "kicking him in the nuts afterwards", you do understand what was happening at the end of WWII, right? The bomb wasn't "kicking them in the nuts", it was the first step of completely subduing the enemy to the point of no retaliation. The Japanese in the past, and even now, have no care for foreigners. They are an elitist race, and, as has been stated, were no where near surrendering. The bombs were necessary for ending the war, period.

I bet it's that angel girl cassiel.... Highly, highly doubt that. Most likely an old friend female Ash made, but whom male Ash doesn't remember. Or just an old friend of Ash that he doesn't remember, period.

Geez dude, don't say that. The problem holding people back from doing wall flips isn't usually ability, but fear (as is stated multiple times in most good tutorials). Unless you weigh like 300 pounds, you can probably do a wall flip (hyperbole, of course >_>). Being more fit helps, but it's just form and overcoming all fear. Your statement doesn't really help that fear factor for some people -_-".

That example deck right there is why I stopped playing. Every [good] deck is almost identical to the next, including yours- over half the cards in that deck are in all the good decks I've seen that go far in tournys. One just puts a couple of staple cards in their deck, utilizes the strategizing skills of a three-year old, and hopes their luck holds out while playing a deck nearly identical to their own. The uniqueness of top-level decks in the game just died over time, completely. It stopped being about combos and decks built for a specific purpose and style, and more about which cards are the best on their own and for every possible situation >_>. Can't stand the YGO TCG anymore, period. Ah well, REBD still ownz. 'kay, done rambling.

Well duh. The average male at Tip.it has an IQ of 193, can bench 400 pounds, is 6'2", went to or is going to an Ivy, is at least a 5th degree black belt, has a great tan, and speaks at least three languages fluently. Everyone knows that.