This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Turkey
Pages: 1 ... 128129130 131132 ... 270
3871
« on: December 03, 2015, 08:35:15 AM »
52. Buy things and go home
3872
« on: December 03, 2015, 08:03:40 AM »
I also wish there was more variation in armor.
Of all the legit complaints you've got, I've never heard this. There's so much variation from crafting (especially since armor isn't just levels of damage resistance, but has real benefits to make different builds). Have you discovered the ballistic weave?
Ballistic weave?
Ballistic weave lets you upgrade other outfits like suits and stuff to have comparable armor rating to other armor sets. With my suit and hat I actually have more armor than fully upgraded combat armor.
3873
« on: December 02, 2015, 07:46:06 PM »
A lack of fluoride poisoning.
3874
« on: December 02, 2015, 06:56:28 PM »
Honestly I think he'd be hamstrung by Congress and the courts. The president doesn't make legislation, so all his talk of closing the border and repealing Obamacare really is just empty.
3875
« on: December 02, 2015, 06:50:52 PM »
Is there any update on what their motivations might be? I had to stop the live feed to walk the dog and make dinner.
3876
« on: December 02, 2015, 06:49:55 PM »
Because you go on to say that removing that legitimacy (gained by the media) will cause them to die out, No, I don't. The removal of their legitimacy is mentioned before I take any note of media coverage. Media coverage is not written in as what allows for them to gain notoriety, it's put in as an extension of what perpetuates it in the West. At no point, at all, do I state "The media ceasing coverage of ISIS will cause them to die out." Nowhere.
Media coverage, for example, only promotes the idea that ISIS is a legitimate state Ultimately, reactions of the public are what allow for ISIS to thrive. Take away the fear, take away their legitimacy, and the group will die out. We're done with this conversation. Good luck with the essay.
3877
« on: December 02, 2015, 06:31:40 PM »
Media coverage, for example, only promotes the idea that ISIS is a legitimate state How is that wrong, and how does it imply anything about ignoring ISIS to the point of extinction?
Because you go on to say that removing that legitimacy (gained by the media) will cause them to die out, as if ISIS gets their legitimacy from notoriety rather than the towns they've captured, the standing army they're paying, or the supply lines that are keeping them alive. To put it bluntly, that entire section of your essay you quoted is just riddled with falsehoods.
3878
« on: December 02, 2015, 06:03:20 PM »
Maybe it's not what you think now, but it's what you've said repeatedly. If we stopped showing ISIS in the media or talking about them on a national scale, they wouldn't give a fuck. In fact, turning a blind eye to them would probably embolden them even more. None of those quotes remotely imply that I believe ignoring ISIS in its entirety will solve the problem. You can't read at a ninth-grade level if you think otherwise, sorry. I made it very clear, many times, that I believe that these are methods that can be used effectively to diminish the legitimacy of a terrorist organization such as ISIS, and that conventional methods of war are less effective than many of us believe them to be in this situation.
I would say "Stop twisting what I'm saying," but you really didn't twist anything-- You just read everything I said completely incorrectly and then made a baseless accusation against what you believe is my position. Try harder.
Damage control: commenced. Also, are you in 9th grade? fuckin' lol Take away the fear, take away their legitimacy, and the group will die out. Media coverage, for example, only promotes the idea that ISIS is a legitimate state If the group is no longer formally recognized, and are seen as foolish or insignificant, then the supposedly glamorous caliphate that they declare will sunk further and further into illegitimacy, losing its appeal to potential recruits. Ultimately, reactions of the public are what allow for ISIS to thrive.
3879
« on: December 02, 2015, 05:54:54 PM »
I've always thought it's kind of shitty for reporters to broadcast live video of a standoff, showing where all the police are taking cover and how they're maneuvering. They shouldn't be allowed to show that footage until it's over, because for all we know the suspects are in the house watching it on CNN as it happens.
3880
« on: December 02, 2015, 05:52:30 PM »
You heard it here folks, if we stop reporting about ISIS they'll just go away.
That's not what I'm saying, and pretty dissimilar from anything I've said at all.
Even the declaration of war against terrorism, in and of itself, is counterproductive to the goal of stopping it. Media coverage, for example, only promotes the idea that ISIS is a legitimate state By removing the factors of intimidation and coercion, one can effectively kill the power associated with acts of terror— Ultimately, reactions of the public are what allow for ISIS to thrive. If the group is no longer formally recognized, and are seen as foolish or insignificant, then the supposedly glamorous caliphate that they declare will sunk further and further into illegitimacy, losing its appeal to potential recruits. ISIS wants glory, and they want recognition; I'll go out on a limb here and draw parallels to what allows for fucked up kids to believe that shooting up a school is how they can remedy their lack of identity and depression. Take away the fear, take away their legitimacy, and the group will die out. Maybe it's not what you think now, but it's what you've said repeatedly. If we stopped showing ISIS in the media or talking about them on a national scale, they wouldn't give a fuck. In fact, turning a blind eye to them would probably embolden them even more.
3881
« on: December 02, 2015, 05:19:52 PM »
You heard it here folks, if we stop reporting about ISIS they'll just go away.
3882
« on: December 02, 2015, 04:59:56 PM »
ISIS wants glory, and they want recognition; I'll go out on a limb here and draw parallels to what allows for fucked up kids to believe that shooting up a school is how they can remedy their lack of identity and depression. Take away the fear, take away their legitimacy, and the group will die out.
This is a monumentally wrong understanding of the motivations of ISIS.
3883
« on: December 02, 2015, 04:58:17 PM »
I'm gonna rip two paragraphs from my World Politics final essay, because one of the prompts was on whether or not conventional warfare tactics were effective against terrorism. The paper's eight pages long, but these two sections are some of the most relevant:
Traditional methods of war have been demonstrated to be largely inefficient. The very treatment of ISIS and other terrorist groups as legitimate threats also contributes to their ego and motivation to continue acts of violence. Even the declaration of war against terrorism, in and of itself, is counterproductive to the goal of stopping it. As stated in The Nation, and following François Hollande declaring war on the Islamic State, “Actual states should not grant such legitimacy to small bands of violent criminals, and the deployment of the language and techniques of war is the best way to lose a campaign against them.” It is explained that France’s efforts to bomb targets in Syria will only further depict it and other UN members as ignorant and unconcerned for civilians, which will then provide ample opportunities for Jihadists to recruit victims of the conflict in dire need of a purpose and revenge. They will be “Groomed as heroes, as soldiers saving their people” (Juan Cole). Force cannot be used in a manner that will result in the destruction of targets who pose no threat, as this creates more threats in the future. This type of solution will contribute little to the greater purpose of eliminating ISIS and its influence from the world.
The destruction of their legitimacy, not only their forces, will see greater contributions to the eventual removal of the Islamic State from world affairs. The governments united against the threat of extremism may eventually favor a type of social rejection of the threat in favor of direct confrontation, which directly contributes to what fuels the fire of militant Jihadists. As quoted in The New York Review of Books, an ISIS member directly stated that the organization wishes to “Expose the weakness of America’s centralized power by pushing it to abandon the media psychological war and war by proxy until it fights directly.” Some of the responses towards the group’s actions, both militarily and socially, have catered to these wishes (Blog, Scott Atran and Nafees Hamid). Media coverage, for example, only promotes the idea that ISIS is a legitimate state, and one whose threats citizens must be weary of. Terrorism is defined as “The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.” By removing the factors of intimidation and coercion, one can effectively kill the power associated with acts of terror— Ultimately, reactions of the public are what allow for ISIS to thrive. If the group is no longer formally recognized, and are seen as foolish or insignificant, then the supposedly glamorous caliphate that they declare will sunk further and further into illegitimacy, losing its appeal to potential recruits. The leaders of ISIS fear this perhaps more than any bombs that they can be killed by. I really just don't understand how you and others in this thread are getting the idea that terrorist groups exist for the sake of chaos, with no tangible goals like establishment of a caliphate, eradication of undesirable ethnic groups, and annexation of territory. Yes they yearn for legitimization, but that doesn't come from the media showing their victims or presidents declaring war on them, it comes from sovereign nations standing by with their thumbs up their asses, watching as they gain more and more ground. We sat by and watched ISIS grow from an insurgency to a standing army that pays its members, has established governments in conquered areas, and has active supply lines. Isolationism is insane.
3884
« on: December 02, 2015, 04:32:01 PM »
Nah, Kanan is a discount Katarn. Same shirt and shoulder pad/glove thing, goatee, attitude, 'grey'/lost jedi vibe, etc.
3885
« on: December 02, 2015, 04:30:01 PM »
I also wish there was more variation in armor.
Of all the legit complaints you've got, I've never heard this. There's so much variation from crafting (especially since armor isn't just levels of damage resistance, but has real benefits to make different builds). Have you discovered the ballistic weave?
3886
« on: December 02, 2015, 04:24:30 PM »
Not invading the Middle East is not isolationism. We'd be giving them what they want if we invade.
Never understood why people say this. No terrorist organization, whether an insurgency or a standing army, wants an invasion by a Western coalition.
3887
« on: December 02, 2015, 03:54:29 PM »
I dunno, it'd be interesting to hear what some of you said.
Used to be a lot of math/sciencey stuff on the Flood. Occasionally some Christianity.
3888
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:56:53 PM »
"Men aren't [taught to behave in a manner than conforms to some cultural expectation, often resulting in harm or distress and a general negative effect on society] or exploited; here's a list of ways in which men are [taught to behave in a manner than conforms to some cultural expectation, often resulting in harm or distress and a general negative effect on society] and exploited."
Isn't it fun when people insult your intelligence?
You're moving his goalposts there. I've never seen anyone try that before.
Try what? You argued that the word 'oppression' isn't accurate, so I just replaced it with a phrase that's more precise but less dramatic.
3889
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:43:29 PM »
You can't say women are oppressed I alread don't. I use words like "exploitation"--I never use words like oppression, because it's just inappropriate to use when referring to a 21st century 1st world country, in my opinion. For both genders.
Well the article and the majority of feminists use the word. This whole line of discussion is barely more than an argument of pedantics. “Men are NOT exploited or [taught to behave in a manner than conforms to some cultural expectation, often resulting in harm or distress and a general negative effect on society] by sexism, but there are ways in which WE suffer as a result of it.”
We are taught early on that “boys don’t cry,” that to show sensitivity or emotional vulnerability is a sign of weakness. Men are discouraged from practicing nurturing, caregiving, compassion and compromise for the same reason. So there is an enormous amount of pressure placed on men to “prove our manhood” by acting tough, projecting strength and repressing our emotions so as to appear in control at all times. This is compounded by the fact that men are often more admired for being aggressive, dominant and violent than for being cooperative, vulnerable or empathetic. Not only is all of this damaging behavior encouraged in individual men, but those same values are also reflected in our larger political and military institutions, often to disastrous effect.
"Men aren't [taught to behave in a manner than conforms to some cultural expectation, often resulting in harm or distress and a general negative effect on society] or exploited; here's a list of ways in which men are [taught to behave in a manner than conforms to some cultural expectation, often resulting in harm or distress and a general negative effect on society] and exploited."
Isn't it fun when people insult your intelligence?
3890
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:33:59 PM »
This appeal to bigger problems is the exact argument feminists fight when people belittle their claim of oppression.
It's not an appeal to bigger problems.
It's an appeal to correct word usage.
If your personal definition of oppression only regards issues as significant as slavery, then very few people are really oppressed in any first world nation. It's an issue of scale, not verbiage. You can't say women are oppressed because they're taught to look beautiful (a common example, not a paraphrase) and then say the same word doesn't fit for teaching boys to be aggressive, unemotional, and tough.
3891
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:24:14 PM »
OP, 'jumping the shark' is a term used to demonstrate when a show has reached a point where the writers have run out of original ideas and resort to some lame shtick to keep viewers interested, correlating with a decline in quality.
An example would be CoD Zombies. "Giving the Covenant back their bomb" is not.
3892
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:13:30 PM »
Look, I consider myself a feminist and I support egalitarianism, but it's just not equitable to say that "feminism is for all" while making a list of ways in which men can support it by 1) listening to women's idea simply because they're women, 2) educating ourselves without expecting women to provide some of the answers (which is inherently contradictory to #1), 3) challenge other men, but not women, and, 4) assuming that most women have firsthand experience with violence and should not be argued with or asked about feminism.
3893
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:08:59 PM »
Nope, it isn't. Oppression is a very strong word, actually. You don't just toss it here and there like it's nothing.
Slaves were oppressed. Being told that it's socially unacceptable to cry as a male... isn't oppression.
This appeal to bigger problems is the exact argument feminists fight when people belittle their claim of oppression.
3894
« on: December 02, 2015, 11:57:48 AM »
“Men are NOT exploited or oppressed by sexism, but there are ways in which WE suffer as a result of it.”
We are taught early on that “boys don’t cry,” that to show sensitivity or emotional vulnerability is a sign of weakness. Men are discouraged from practicing nurturing, caregiving, compassion and compromise for the same reason. So there is an enormous amount of pressure placed on men to “prove our manhood” by acting tough, projecting strength and repressing our emotions so as to appear in control at all times. This is compounded by the fact that men are often more admired for being aggressive, dominant and violent than for being cooperative, vulnerable or empathetic. Not only is all of this damaging behavior encouraged in individual men, but those same values are also reflected in our larger political and military institutions, often to disastrous effect. "Men aren't oppressed or exploited; here's a list of ways in which men are oppressed and exploited." Isn't it fun when people insult your intelligence?
3895
« on: December 02, 2015, 11:15:40 AM »
I hate making eggnog drinks at work . When ever i steam the milk that shit pops and goes straight into my eyes. Plus it's gross.
Steamed milk in eggnog? Wat
3896
« on: December 02, 2015, 11:14:04 AM »
Too bad bench pressing has no viable means of strength IRL other than a bragging notion and aesthetics.
Chest strength has no practical application? lolwut? OT: Nice job man, that's a huge benchmark. Trying increasing by 5lbs at a time from now on.
3897
« on: December 02, 2015, 10:10:59 AM »
I always figured some of the matter went into the accretion disk and started orbiting around a black hole as it was being pulled in (so long as there was a sufficient amount) ergo some of it gets ejected from the immense pressure and velocity. Isn't that how Quasars work?
The researchers are claiming it wasn't ejected from the accretion disk, and it came from near the event horizon. Also, in Verb's defense, it's been shown that while there is no theoretical mass upper limit for a black hole, there is an upper limit at which the force of ejections from the accretion disk prevents surrounding matter from being pulled in, resulting in the black hole staying approximately the same mass from then on.
3898
« on: December 01, 2015, 08:33:24 PM »
It's a liberal's wet dream. A morally superior news team set in the past using the writers' hindsight to judge people's actions in the day. Not really sure how anyone even somewhat moderate can stomach some of the speeches.
3899
« on: December 01, 2015, 02:20:28 PM »
Anyone have it yet? Is it as great as it looks? There's talk of crippling bugs, but goddamn it looks so fun. 
3900
« on: December 01, 2015, 02:15:04 PM »
I wanted to join the Army out of high school as a tank crewman but then I found out you can't be a tank crewman if you're over 6' and I'm 6'2". Did a recruiter tell you that? Height restrictions are mostly a guideline in almost any case.
Pages: 1 ... 128129130 131132 ... 270
|
Show Posts