Random Banter

Jim of WVa

Jim of WVa

Well Known GateFan
Lord Ba'al said:
Did you know they're building a Titanic II? Aim is for it to set sail a few years from now and the maiden voyage will be the same as the original Titanic, Southampton to New York. The ship will be made to look the same but with modern tech. It should also have replicas of some key features such as the staircase. Some Australian company is building it, or ordering it, I believe.
Click to expand...

I would enjoy a voyage on such a ship.
 
Jim of WVa

Jim of WVa

Well Known GateFan
Lord Ba'al said:
No. She is an executive at Marvel and she is going out in the media proclaiming her personal longings for a gay super hero to be included in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. She is perfectly aware that in today's climate of rainbows and shit it is not socially acceptable for anyone to give any sort of criticism whatsoever on gay aspects. She knows that if anyone would speak out against her on this topic in any way shape or form, that person would by the general public be perceived to and made out to be a "bad person" whilst she herself comes across as the "good person". She has effectively put her own personal agenda in the spotlight in a way which makes it hard to be ignored. Essentially she has leveraged the fact that she's gay in combination with the fact that it is socially unacceptable to critique gayness to benefit her agenda. She may have also done so in part just to put herself in the spotlight. One could argue in fact that she has actually ABUSED gay people and their struggles in general by doing this. Not to mention the pressure she has now put on Marvel to either produce a gay super hero or to come up with a very good reason not to produce a gay super hero. If I were her boss, I would be looking into whether or not it would be possible to terminate her employment.
Click to expand...

It would be fun/sick to watch Ben Grimm sodomize some ordinary human up the arse.
 
Jim of WVa

Jim of WVa

Well Known GateFan
PussyGalore said:
...
I would actually try this particular recipe if I didn't have such a bad reaction to White Castle. I usually have a cast iron stomach but there's something about their sliders that ruins my digestive track for several days after eating that stuff.
...
Click to expand...

I used to have a cast iron stomach. I wished that I still had the cast iron stomach. IT IS NOT FAIR!!!!
 
Overmind One

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
Twalet Brash said:
Agree again with most of your post except Japan acquiring nukes. They don't need an absolute deterrent, just enough to make others think twice about coming ashore. I don't expect Japan could hold off an all-out assault by China under any circumstance, even if they had nukes. That's what allies are for.
Click to expand...

Well, when your ally is the United States, you can't be too sure. Countries need protection from aggression from the US as well. I find it ludicrous that the US, the only nation ever to actually use nuclear weapons against another nation, is arrogantly acting as some sort of "nuclear police" trying to prevent others from having them.
 
Overmind One

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
YJ02

YJ02

Well Known GateFan
Overmind One said:
My point is that having a military is not going to protect Japan from China or anyone. Nothing they build is going to check Chinese aggression in the region.
Click to expand...

so, a nation has no right to at least try and protect itself? do you know how many PRC troops would break on the shores of japan? It would be like the Hot Gates all over again-- Persia had a huge army but they couldn't bring it all to bear on such a small point of attack at once. Same with attacking an island nation-the smaller the island the easier it is to fend off the attacker

Japan has a right to do this without our help.

and whatever the reason; if there is no other reason then it frees us up from our commitments there. do we really want to get in a war with walmart's base of manufacturing (the PRC) over japan-or any where else?

and, if it is useless to try to protect one's nation or oneself, then why own a gun? all those criminals out there are far more heavily armed and one person with a gun is not going to check their aggression.
 
Overmind One

Overmind One

GateFans Gatemaster
Staff member
yongjin02 said:
so, a nation has no right to at least try and protect itself? do you know how many PRC troops would break on the shores of japan? It would be like the Hot Gates all over again-- Persia had a huge army but they couldn't bring it all to bear on such a small point of attack at once. Same with attacking an island nation-the smaller the island the easier it is to fend off the attacker

Japan has a right to do this without our help.

and whatever the reason; if there is no other reason then it frees us up from our commitments there. do we really want to get in a war with walmart's base of manufacturing (the PRC) over japan-or any where else?

and, if it is useless to try to protect one's nation or oneself, then why own a gun? all those criminals out there are far more heavily armed and one person with a gun is not going to check their aggression.
Click to expand...

I am not challenging their right to do whatever they want. I am just saying it is pointless and economically and strategically irrelevant if they create a military.
 
YJ02

YJ02

Well Known GateFan
Overmind One said:
I am just saying it is pointless and economically and strategically irrelevant if they create a military.
Click to expand...

well..that can be said for anyone's military! :)

but, things being as they are, I call it good the more these other places can do stuff on their own-especially the ones who can afford to-instead of us doing it for them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top