Official Off Topic Thread

[turke]

Rose, you drag the subject to some other extent. I am not against your idea about the history of wars and stuff. I am against the idea of the wars being the reason of scientific development.

OK, now some different approach to the subject. May be all wars had a reason, may be not. My idea is, war is a very ancient instinct of primates (mostly) which has two main reasons in its nature.

1. To gain more territory, so more food, so to pave the way to breed more and increase the population of the group until the nature gets in the way to stop you from being too powerfull (eventually). So we are back to square one.

2. Pretty simple. To defend your group against the other group in subject 1.

So now, are we still no different than chimpanzees or what ? It is up to you to decide.

 

[RiderOfJustice]

woa...

 

[Time-Machinist]

When it comes to the study of history, how are we to shape the future in whatever way it is that we want it, without a full understanding of the past?

I have no objection to this statement. We do not have any chance to intervene to the past. Besides i'm also against criticizing the past with the perspective and dynamics of today.

But i don't agree with Ofsinsandshred's words such as;

"If it weren't for wars, our technology would be years behind in flight, propulsion, nuclear physics, etc."

^^Let them be behind, rather than millions of people's deaths, unimaginable pains; the seeds of hatred sown during the wars; negative effects of which still prevail.

or

"Anyway, I didn't want to write a book. What I'm saying is that there are a lot of ideas that we use in everyday life that were developed during war time."

and your support to him saying:

"Thank you...these are exactly the cases I was going to cite. Even some antibiotics and painkillers got extra attention and funding because of the need to treat injured and ill soldiers."

What if this advancements hadn't been that fast? Would todays people say "ow, we are still quite uncivilized and technologically undeveloped"? And who knows that we would be less happy in a technologically less developed but a more natural world? (I dont talk about staying or turning back to primitive BTW)

Or, ok let every kind of technological development, advancement be as fast as possible. Let's victimize everything that create obstacles to the advancement, or celebrate everything that speed up this "going-ahead" process, ignoring the shortcomings for the sake of our goals. What would we expect to attain in the end? Human dethrones god? Sounds cool for a humanist (which i am not )

In cognitive, philosophical or moral context, i fully support easy-paced and well-digested advancement. And i am against excessive, unnatural and destructive "advancement!!!s" of any kind.

 

[Horus]

woa...

 

[theVikingR]

OK, now some different approach to the subject. May be all wars had a reason, may be not. My idea is, war is a very ancient instinct of primates (mostly) which has two main reasons in its nature.

1. To gain more territory, so more food, so to pave the way to breed more and increase the population of the group until the nature gets in the way to stop you from being too powerfull (eventually). So we are back to square one.

2. Pretty simple. To defend your group against the other group in subject 1.

So now, are we still no different than chimpanzees or what ? It is up to you to decide.

Your assumptions are flawed - war is neither simple nor rational. Very few, if any, wars these days begin because someone wants more territory or food - you can't even accuse the US of just going into Iraq for the sake of oil: there are so many historical factors that influence attitudes toward and from the entire Middle East for one. There are also many different interests and interests of allies at stake, along with the consideration (and I guarantee it was there) of stability in the region.
A war based on a clash of ideology can't be rational, by its definition. If it were as simple as one side being logically correct, then of course there wouldn't be a war in the first place because that would be a measurable fact. People are generally inherently prejudiced and loyal to the faction/party/religion/country they were born into along with whatever world view they were brought up with.

War is unfortunately part of the human condition and while it is easy to sit at a computer and write posts about how easily humanity's problems can be solved, it is much more difficult in practice. I'd suggest starting by reconsidering just how simple war really is.

 

[turke]

Your assumptions are flawed - war is neither simple nor rational. Very few, if any, wars these days begin because someone wants more territory or food - you can't even accuse the US of just going into Iraq for the sake of oil: there are so many historical factors that influence attitudes toward and from the entire Middle East for one. There are also many different interests and interests of allies at stake, along with the consideration (and I guarantee it was there) of stability in the region.
A war based on a clash of ideology can't be rational, by its definition. If it were as simple as one side being logically correct, then of course there wouldn't be a war in the first place because that would be a measurable fact. People are generally inherently prejudiced and loyal to the faction/party/religion/country they were born into along with whatever world view they were brought up with.

War is unfortunately part of the human condition and while it is easy to sit at a computer and write posts about how easily humanity's problems can be solved, it is much more difficult in practice. I'd suggest starting by reconsidering just how simple.

...says the "USA government press agent". Thank you.

One always drag the conversation to justifying actions of America, even when no America or USA word has ever been used in any of the posts. While i let you think with your so "complicated" mind, i'll get along with my "simple" thoughts, which are more complicated to me than you can ever imagine.

 

[DoomsdayZach]

Too much to read.

 

[Kenneth R.]

i have no political agenda sober.. i love war.. just kidding.. war blows, its just a pointless destruction of life, and almost always over the money and power of some asshole's 'god complex'

 

[Jax]

We had a blizzard yesterday & got about a foot of snow, & it's been snowing all day today & hasn't gotten above 5°F all day..now, I love the snow, but it really could stop any time now *freezes arse off*.

 

[Horus]

At least you have snow.

 

[Tubbs]

I haven't been outside of my house for over 3 days, and my shades have been closed the whole time, so I haven't even seen if it's snowed or anything outside.

 

[Kenneth R.]

At least you have snow.

it has been snowing here since last week. every day. every night.

 

[Taliwakker]

Zach wrote

how do you go totally red and not get b&?

i was in the red in early dec 06.....i guess my sense of humour was not appreciated by some.

 

[SilentRealm]

its been raining here - and I dont just mean raining, I mean torrential rain thats cut off all the roads into town so not only has the entire town run out of all things such as umbrellas and raincoats, there's no way of getting any more in until the flooding subsides.

 

[Valerie]

Whoa, LadyValerie, your sig needs big time editing, it's WAY too big.

Thanks

I don't see why you went out of your way or even care about my sig, seeing as how I never post here. I only posted one question. But just for complaining, you get to look at it again. Very good.

 

[SilentRealm]

^ someone's got it coming

 

[1by4by9]

Hmmm, this balloonfish tastes funny.

 

[Tubbs]

I don't see why you went out of your way or even care about my sig, seeing as how I never post here. I only posted one question. But just for complaining, you get to look at it again. Very good.

Don't fuck with Jax. You've been warned.

 

[SilentRealm]

^ no.. let her.. i want to see what happens

 

[Taliwakker]

Scrag.....