"I'm ready to lose control, but they're not"
-
@solo said:
Marian wrote:
@unknownuser said:
I say if Tomasz can't provide proof or valid arguments, but he still believes in what he believes
Hmmm, sound fimiliar??
They call that religion.
Yes Solo that's towards where i was aiming discreetly, i mean what proof can you ask for the existnece of GOD, people are free to believe in anything they want, it's they're right, even if those things are not enough for you, it's enough for them.
-
True - but they shouldn't imply their beliefs are based on fact by insisting they posess proof. Bad form, that.
-
Tomasz, that's nonesense. If you are talking about a situation in which the majority of people die, the survivors are not going to be bothering themselves about burying all those bodies in hermetically sealed canisters simply to avoid disease. By far the simplest choice is to simply move to where there aren't any bodies...like out of the cities and into the countryside or onto the coast...where you actually stand a chance of finding something to eat.
In any case, the whole concept of a polarity shift (if that's what you are talking about) causing a wordwide cataclysm is, itself, total nonsense and very bad science. The geological records show that it happens fairly regularly and has almost certainly happened thousands of times before with no evidence of any kind of mass extinction. It's also far more likely to happen perhaps 2000 years from now than a mere 3. A magnetic polarity shift is an extreme inconvenience in this digital age, not a catastrophe. It wouldn't even affect most electronics; it switches extremely slowly...from months to millenia. It's not an electromagnetic pulse; and there's absolutely no reason why it would have any noticeable effect on the weather.
Back to the 9/11 question: Stinkie is absolutely right. Those who doubt the news reports are required to provide evidence...and much better evidence than some movie plot. Otherwise the rest of us have no more reason to doubt what has been reported than we do last Saturday's football results...or maybe they're a conspiracy too; designed to make millions for some gambling syndicate?
-
again i think it is a matter of whether you have any doubt about the official saying, or you do not.
On the side of the official saying it is all said.
On the side of the un_official saying it is still cooking.
If you doubt the proofs and evidences of the official saying you are required to prove it.
Ok.
Fair enough.
only thing is that it should not be taken as an attack to usa democracy the people who investigates now.In any case, we will probably never get to know what really happened. So may be the question is unprofitable.
Maybe the question should be, how is it that those towers were vanished because of the hate of the people who hates USA ?
Has USA done anything to them to be hated so greatly ? -
-
My point is ...
I have no point.Elisei
PS:Media always made things worse(edited)!!!!!
PPS:
@unknownuser said:Has USA done anything to them to be hated so greatly ?
Had Nagasaki and Hiroshima done anything to be hated so greatly?
-
isn t that wurst ? -
In German, yeah. Not in Dutch.
-
@unknownuser said:
@ely862me said:
PS:Media always made thinks worst!!!!!
Mmm ... worst.
Granted ... worst pun ever.
Thanks stinkie...I just spit coffee all over my screen. Damn good one, that was.
-
@ely862me said:
Had Nagasaki and Hiroshima done anything to be hated so greatly?
That's bad comparison.
It was a declared war against a nation, not a nebulous group that can hide amongst an otherwise innocent civilian population. It was also believed at the time that the cost of invading the Japanese homeland with troops would have caused more casualties than the use of the bomb. Unfortunately, the use of the bomb caused awful casualties, and all of them on the Japanese side.
I dislike armchair quarterbacking this decision because none of us were alive at the time to understand what was happening, and none of us were present or are privy to the analysis of the information that led to the decision to use the bomb. The bomb is a terrible weapon, but when it was believed that every man, woman and child on the Japanese homeland would be willing to sacrifice themselves to kill an Allied soldier - what was to be done? With the hatred of the atomic bomb and the knowledge of its terrible effects today, it might be easier to think an invasion might not be such a bad idea; but that's a decision made with the luxury of hindsight.
Atomic bombs during declared war between two nations does not equal suicide bombs or aircraft hijackings against an unsuspecting nation.
-
i am sorry i derivated the thread
funny how we people discuss about things taking irredentorial positions while maybe we are at the start of world war iii
-
When some US soldiers came to have some trainings in Romania ..i ve said UPS now the terrorists are going to put the target on us
(i was worry because the americans comes to our country )
Somehow the US manage to do damage by trying to make order.I don t know ..
When the terrorists blow up the towers ..one of my classmates said: They(US) believed to much they re center of the Earth . I give him right a bit(faar away to agree with terrorists).
Wherever a trouble comes ...hops US...something happens hops US.
I may be wrong..or not..i m not a politician maybe i should shut,but we ve free opinion ..
And i still don t forget that US in the 2nd War let us on the hand of USSR.
.Our future it would have been lot more different.Anyway this is just my opinion.
-
ely862me,
Americans are saddened by the role our government takes sometimes in World affairs and the recent arrogance in foreign policy.
It is very unfortunate what happened to Eastern Europe, but going back to 50 years ago, are you forgetting the American lives that were lost on European soil to stop the Nazi's? It was a bad mistake to let your country go. Perhaps the leaders then did not see how much the USSR would grab or think they could beat Russia (who ever has?), but the alternative could have been another massive war, with your country being the battleground.
You say "I may be wrong..or not..i m not a politician maybe i should shut,but we ve free opinion .." Yes, you have a free opinion and should speak freely. Where do you think that idea came from? The United States that once meant freedom to other nations, is the one I think we all hope will manifest itself in years to come.
And to be clear: We can argue, but you have a RIGHT to say what you feel. (Some governments don't know this yet. I just saw a Romanian film about Romania in the 80's and it looked like very tough living.)
-
The US and Britain let Eastern Europe go cause they were unprepared for another war, especially with someone who they told they're peoples that it was an ally, i mean there wouldn't have been any popular support for another bloody war.
But they didn't let go Eastern Europe without a diplomatic fight, they were just unprepared for the type of diplomacy Russia had to offer, a back stabbing, deceitfull diploamcy, the Allies's greates fault was that they were fair and thought Stallin would be too. -
Ely862me,
I figure that Pbacot and Marian have summed it up pretty well, and I'm not trying to attack you. I'm quite happy to have a good discussion with you, and your opinions are welcome - so don't feel like I'm trying to shut you up. As with any internet discussion, any time you type something, there is almost 100% guarantee someone will disagree with you, and do so angrily. Luckily this message board is pretty civilized, even when there are disagreements.
You are correct about the US jumping in, often where they are not wanted. I don't claim to have any understanding of why we do, and I often don't agree with what my government does. I do wish we'd keep our noses, and soldiers, out of everyone else's business.
-
Like I always said, The problems in Zimbabwe would never have gotten so dire if they had even a morsel of oil, as without oil America is not interested in helping.
-
Usually I try to not post comments in threads like this because i m not that old(22) to know many things like u(well the majority) know.
But i do like to give my opinion if that subject touches me from some direction.
Overall in this short life,each one is doing his share(even if we agree or not with everyone*s share).
Have a nice day,night,morning people! -
@tig said:
Unfortunately "irredentorial" is probably not a word in most languages - except perhaps in some non-standard Spanish - BUT it should mean something like "unredeeming" if it were... do you mean this - something like 'not able to be saved, recovered or changed by any sacrifice' ?
thanks TIG,
exactly -
@solo said:
Like I always said, The problems in Zimbabwe would never have gotten so dire if they had even a morsel of oil, as without oil America is not interested in helping.
Way, waytoo true.
-
@solo said:
Like I always said, The problems in Zimbabwe would never have gotten so dire if they had even a morsel of oil, as without oil America is not interested in helping.
Who is America interested in helping?
Advertisement