conspiracy doesn't necessarily cause war. it just causes tension and distrust.Originally Posted by Rayne
rivalries could also be a result.
i mean, china and the USA have horrible tension between each other, but that doesn't stop them from having economic exchange and it never caused war.
your welcome
but do EVERYONE
thats what youre implying isnt it
i'm not implying that everyone has tension, but ALOT of people have tension between other people.
same with countries, politicians, cities, cultures, races, etc.
your welcome
god was only referring to prevention large scale wars between countries like usa and iraq or usa and vietnam. tensions may exist but the probability of wars being prevented is extremely high. look around you: at least 70% of the wars fought in the last 50 years have been instigated by the usa. if their politicians pulled their heads out of their asses ta da majority of future wars prevented.
Without reading anything but the thread title, war advances technology. The end.
And video game marketing
Doodles and such.
Mah facebook.
3DS FC: 3394 - 4659 - 2348
PS3: ledzephed
Wii FC: 3915 - 2703 - 2412 - 8556
Who cares about the millions of lives that have parished!?
Don't even get on your moral high horse and say that you do. No one really cares about each individual that has died in a war. The Mayans, the Nazi's, the Jews, the Japanese... ancient tribes, etc.
One death is a tragedy, a million is just a statistic.
I'm saying that war is a natural outcome of human nature. That we must accept it for what it is and go on living.
In other words, become in different to something we cannot control because it's a waste of time and energy to cry over it.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
I disputed that like two pages ago
Just because man's natural systems aren't ment for the Moon that doesn't mean we shouldn't of gone there. As humans I hope we have evolved beyond a point where natural instincts don't totally control out lives and desicions.
Kirby, what you're babbling about has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. You just trailed WAY off topic.
I think that the sacrifices of the lives in war is permissible when not in vain, however, fighting for causes that are not in either protection of our freedom or for the greater good of their own nation are inhumane and no one should throw their life away like that. I'm talking about Hitler's third Reich, or any other empire that's gone and killed people just to expand their borders. I may even be throwing us under the bus here.
Basically, fighting off invasion, civil war, and defending a sister country are the only reasons I'd see war acceptable by. Entering world war I because of a telegram about Mexicans plotting to invade is silly and I would have increased security around the border instead.
“I’m growing impatient with these malevolent slithering reptiles on this bloody aircraft.”
- Snakes on a Plane (As if spoken by a proper Englishman)
What the hell? Ever heard of cap and trade? Of course we still burn coal, you idiot. Oil will always be efficient money, dumb ass, up until we're forced to create clean energy less efficiently. That's why we've still been resorting to oil, because it's not as costly and inefficient as solar/wind/nuclear. Geothermal looks promising though.
“I’m growing impatient with these malevolent slithering reptiles on this bloody aircraft.”
- Snakes on a Plane (As if spoken by a proper Englishman)
From the beginning, I've said the war is war. It is what it is, a cause and effect created human. Which is a natural phenomena. I'm not justifying it, I'm saying forget about justifying it and move on.
But Rayne on the other hand insits that war is wrong... or something. Not to sure what his point really is in that.
Then for my "Black and White" moral view. It isn't. You need at least two types of paint to get grey.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
I am pretty sure in the next 10 years oil will go to absurd levels in cost. Yes we have some other ways of stuff like wind but its costly and most likely we will just go back to coal. And for a while there things will look like 1880 tech.
Okay Kirby, I'll play. Support why you think "we will go back to coal," "why oil will cost so much in 10yrs" and you think we'll go "steam-punk" instead of advancing out technology.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
Oil still has another 50-100 years or viability, Kirbx, and coal another quarter millennium. By the time oil reaches unaffordable prices, there will be cheaper alternative fuels balancing the switch over. Trust me, we'll all be driving hybrids long before the oil industry collapses. We'll create more jobs with alt fuels than oil's lost.
“I’m growing impatient with these malevolent slithering reptiles on this bloody aircraft.”
- Snakes on a Plane (As if spoken by a proper Englishman)
It's okay! Kirby knows it all!!
He has yet to graduate high school, experienced and saw millions of things inside the state that he is from to make miraculous judgements of the world and the economy.
All hail Kirby and Naïvety!
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
I could of swore I saw a distcovery channel show that said 10 years. I mean it was 2 fucking hours explaining the history of oil. If not 10 atleast 20 then. I mean top oil production happened in the 80s after that technology may increase but oil discoveries don't. Some companies have even resorted to "tar picking" which is a real life scraping the bottom out the the metaphorical barrel of oil.
Okay kirby, it depends on who you get your facts from. Some whacko environmentalist scientists want people to think oil supplies will run dry in 4-5 years time. But if you ask an optimist, someone who's been studying oil reserves for YEARS, they will estimate we have another four decades or more. Don't panic man, this 4 year bullshit is a joke, if it were true this oil spill going on would be ruining the country.
“I’m growing impatient with these malevolent slithering reptiles on this bloody aircraft.”
- Snakes on a Plane (As if spoken by a proper Englishman)
four years is bullshit but i dont think theres any type of four decades consensus
im not aware of any consensus at all on the issue.
Didn't I say a decade or 2. Where do you pull 4 years from?
You got your "facts" from a television channel? The same channel that shows "documentaries" of ghosts and aliens. It's just as professional as the History Channel.
You have to remember one important thing about all television stations... they survive on ratings. Which usually depends on the shots some executive is making.
So a lot that you watch is exaggerated.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
it was in a report I read some time ago that supported your claims that oil would run out sooner than expected. 4 years, or 10 years, they're both a fallacy
“I’m growing impatient with these malevolent slithering reptiles on this bloody aircraft.”
- Snakes on a Plane (As if spoken by a proper Englishman)
I don't know man even without TV shows I have seen within my own life time literary oil triple in price. And India and China are just starting to use cars. Its very possible the tap could run dry or atleast run only dips in a matter of a decade.
Wth?
Originally made by LM:
~ I have said nothing because there is nothing I can say that would describe how I feel as perfectly as you deserve it. -- Kyle Schmidt ~
~Silence is one of the hardest arguments to refute. -- Josh Billings ~
* dragon_berry**Fallen_Wings*
hahaha
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
