Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Political Discussion Thread
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by aretood2 View PostI don't think that word means what you think it means...
Err, that's not what FH was saying.
Ma'at is a concept like Karma, but unlike Karma, Ma'at has been (wrongly) deified.
Hey everyone! The bible isn't about living a life respecting justice, order, and harmony...neither are the Buddha's teachings. Who knew?
Buddhists are just less likely to ignore the non violence aspect. (if indeed the bible has such a thing, some Christians like to point out that it doesn't)
The whole "Weighing the soul after death" thing doesn't really sound like pure philosophical or scientific conceptualization.sigpicALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yetThe truth isn't the truth
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View Post
Comment
-
Originally posted by pscard View PostIt's kinda silly that two world leaders have reduced their rhetoric to name-calling. I wish they would have a REAL dialog of peace.
Kim is doing a carefully calculated maneuver here. His regime derives power from the US as the ultimate evil, and the development of nukes as the only deterrent against imminent invasion. They've been doing this bark for decades.
Trump doesn't seem to do calculated maneuvers, but it does work in his benefit: it's an easy way to look strong. Hell, it's why this has been a thing at all: Kim seems strong in his country, and other world leaders can easily look strong by reacting to it. The attention dies down, some deal is reached that benefits everyone and the next cycle starts.
The issue with these threats however, is that it can easily lead to unwanted escalation. Moreso on the US than the NK side. NK doesn't want to attack, merely the theoretical capability to do so. After all, there's a snowball's chance in hell that NK will win, but it sure as hell can inflict massive damage. If not to the US mainland, then to it's pacific assets, allies and the entire region.
After all, Trump doesn't literally possess a nuclear button with which to launch a missile: Some guy in a missile silo does. The same for NK. If America were to pick up some signal that NK launched a missile straight at, say, Guam, by the time that info gets through decisions will be made on a minute-to-minute basis. Which leaves VERY little time to check: whether calculations are correct, whether measurements are correct. It will leave no time for diplomats to question intentions, no time for anyone to really know anything new. Is it a nuke? is it not? A rogue missile? A defect? is it scheduled to explode mid-flight as a statement? A genuine attack?
After that, NK can nuke SK, Japan or china with really nothing the US can do. Shooting down missiles is hard, and there's no guarantee that the US can maintain a perfect missile perimeter. First strike by the US is preferred, but then China may get involved.
And nobody wants to open up the pandora's box that is NK, with it's poor, underfed, indoctrinated and violently suppressed people. Nobody wants a korean ISIS with nukes.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Annoyed View PostT...there will be a lot of civilian casualties in NK....
Originally posted by aretood2 View PostI don't think that word means what you think it means...Hey everyone! The bible isn't about living a life respecting justice, order, and harmony...neither are the Buddha's teachings. Who knew?Heightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Annoyed View PostThat ain't gonna happen, not with that nut job in NK. He has been belligerent & provocative for how many years?
Look at it this way. Would you rather have flying insults or flying military hardware? If it avoids a war, let 'em stick their tongues out at each other for all I care. I really don't want to see a war here.
But it might happen.
I don't think the US will strike first. If he launches against the US or an ally, there's a fair to middlin chance we can shoot down whatever he launches (if it doesn't fall out of the sky on its own)
But successful or not, if he strikes first, I'm pretty sure there will be a war. The US doesn't need nukes to put him down, thankfully. And I really don't think that NK has a sufficient arsenal to sustain a nuclear war. So it won't likely be an all out nuclear holocaust. But we will take him out and there will be a lot of civilian casualties in NK.
The worst part of this is that the NK people aren't the problem, it's just the nuts running the country. It's sad, but even though they will be kept to a minimum, there will be casualties.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mad_gater View Postyup...that's the hard thing about war....that no matter how hard you try there will always be civilian casualties (not to mention quite a bit of property damage) which is why war should only be a very last possible resort....and whether Dictator Fathead has pushed us to that brink yet is a debatable questionsigpicALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yetThe truth isn't the truth
Comment
-
Originally posted by thekillman View Post
After all, Trump doesn't literally possess a nuclear button with which to launch a missile: Some guy in a missile silo does. The same for NK. If America were to pick up some signal that NK launched a missile straight at, say, Guam, by the time that info gets through decisions will be made on a minute-to-minute basis. Which leaves VERY little time to check: whether calculations are correct, whether measurements are correct. It will leave no time for diplomats to question intentions, no time for anyone to really know anything new. Is it a nuke? is it not? A rogue missile? A defect? is it scheduled to explode mid-flight as a statement? A genuine attack?Total syffy posts: 36,690
(Chosen One)
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
Matthew 5:9
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View Postyes.
Also, NK says the US declared war... which is funny since you can't technically declare war on a country you're still technically at war with.Heightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View PostErr, that's not what FH was saying.
Ma'at is a concept like Karma, but unlike Karma, Ma'at has been (wrongly) deified.
They both are, just THIER justice, THIER order, THIER harmony.
Buddhists are just less likely to ignore the non violence aspect. (if indeed the bible has such a thing, some Christians like to point out that it doesn't)
It's philosophical for sure, the feather of truth (which is what it is called, not the feather of Ma'at) is a self judgemental system, and if the goal of science is objective truth, it fits that criterion as well.
Originally posted by Falcon Horus View PostI wasn't aware only religious people can live a life respecting justice, order and harmony.
Comment
-
Originally posted by aretood2 View PostBut that doesn't negate that it is introduced within Egyptian religion. Religions tend to come stock full with philosophical concepts, Ma'at happens to be one of those concepts. It was developed within a religious context just as I hypothesize Mesopotamian legal codes were developed.
Perfect example: ChristmasHeightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Falcon Horus View PostWhich made my sister snort so loud I had to ask her what funny thing she was reading.
Also, NK says the US declared war... which is funny since you can't technically declare war on a country you're still technically at war with.
Comment
Comment