What would you have done

[marharth]

You really think that countries will work together peaceful and fairly split up new worlds?

Under current regulations, of which basically all space faring nations have signed, kind of yes. basically no one can own bits of space yet.

 

http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html

Treaties can be broken, laws can be disregarded.

 

Not only that, it could be done in secret for a long time before anyone found out.

[Keanumoreira]

Are you assuming that every government is evil?

I do. Name three governments that haven't ended in disaster, or aren't headed that way now.

 

Why can't it be a one world government with less law then the US has? Why can't it simply be a government that has a police department, simple laws, and nothing more?

That's the biggest police department I've ever seen, and that police department would really have to be more like a military. Just because we're all one happy nation doesn't mean you aren't going to be fighting wars. Criminals have some heavy firepower now, most police offices in the US can't handle AK-caliber weaponry. As far as simple laws go, laws are never simple. If laws were simple, we wouldn't need lawyers.

 

What is forcing a world government from being large and bad?

A legion of armed civilians willing to (and capable of) do something about it if that happens. Barring that, we're f(*#ed, pardon the profanity.

 

 

Do you really think nations can work together to move towards things like space colonization?

 

Yes...they can, nations have been working together since the dawn of civilization. Yes, we've had our differences, of course we've fought on and off, but that doesn't mean that we can't see past those and come togehter for a greater benefit. To say that nations can't work together-and that includes space colonization-is, it seems, to only be in your opinion. In fact, nations can and have and will come together to get past difficulties. Prime examples can be found in both of the World Wars.

We almost got in a war with the soviet union over nuclear capabilities and space travel. Wouldn't say that is very good.

 

So far we have gotten to the moon, and launched satellites. What about when we get further down the road? You really think that countries will work together peaceful and fairly split up new worlds?

 

And who are you? Can you see the future now, cause I would big money to see that. You don't know what lies in the future, no one does, we can only predict. People predicted that the world would be destroyed in WWII, but it isn't destroyed now is it? We may still be picking up the pieces, but it's still around isn't it? The fact that you're saying countries can't work together is an opinion because you don't know that....that's only what you think. Countries are still working together to this day and fighting as well, yes. But how do you know that things can't get better? The answer? You don't...

Edited June 11, 2011 by Keanumoreira

[RZ1029]

And who are you?

I'm RZ1029. Nice to meet you, I smell bitterness.

 

Can you see the future now, cause I would big money to see that.

I can, I do and I have. Your shortsightedness is amusing.

You don't know what lies in the future, no one does, we can only predict.

My predictions just happen to be very accurate.

 

People predicted that the world would be destroyed in WWII, but it isn't destroyed now is it?

Depends on whose world. Germans really got the short end of the stick on that one.

 

We may still be picking up the pieces, but it's still around isn't it?

Holding on with duct tape and string, no doubt.

The fact that you're saying countries can't work together is an opinion because you don't know that....that's only what you think. Countries are still working together to this day and fighting as well, yes. But how do you know that things can't get better? The answer? You don't...

Hmm... track records for cooperation: bad. Track records for war: pretty good. Google the phrase "war" and you get: 2,180,000,000 results. Google the phrase "peace" and you get: 743,000,000. One-third the result, even Google knows it's pretty hopeless. If 3/4s prefers war, 3/4ths is well above a majority. See? The interwebz can teach you stuff. Also...

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XBl0qQoEqQY/TSddd6FqwAI/AAAAAAAAAxw/yv_8fiMtKDE/s1600/WhySoSerious.jpg

That is such a freaking awesome picture, just saying.

 

EDIT: Also... ZOMGWTFBBQSAWCE... Marharth and I agreeing? It really is the apocalypse... just a few weeks late.

 

RE-EDIT: That picture... now my background. Probably the best movie I've seen in a while.

 

RE-RE-EDIT: Also, James Cameron's Avatar... also amazing.

Edited June 11, 2011 by RZ1029

[Keanumoreira]

And who are you?

I'm RZ1029. Nice to meet you, I smell bitterness.

 

Can you see the future now, cause I would big money to see that.

I can, I do and I have. Your shortsightedness is amusing.

You don't know what lies in the future, no one does, we can only predict.

My predictions just happen to be very accurate.

 

People predicted that the world would be destroyed in WWII, but it isn't destroyed now is it?

Depends on whose world. Germans really got the short end of the stick on that one.

 

We may still be picking up the pieces, but it's still around isn't it?

Holding on with duct tape and string, no doubt.

The fact that you're saying countries can't work together is an opinion because you don't know that....that's only what you think. Countries are still working together to this day and fighting as well, yes. But how do you know that things can't get better? The answer? You don't...

Hmm... track records for cooperation: bad. Track records for war: pretty good. Google the phrase "war" and you get: 2,180,000,000 results. Google the phrase "peace" and you get: 743,000,000. One-third the result, even Google knows it's pretty hopeless. If 3/4s prefers war, 3/4ths is well above a majority. See? The interwebz can teach you stuff. Also...

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XBl0qQoEqQY/TSddd6FqwAI/AAAAAAAAAxw/yv_8fiMtKDE/s1600/WhySoSerious.jpg

That is such a freaking awesome picture, just saying.

 

EDIT: Also... ZOMGWTFBBQSAWCE... Marharth and I agreeing? It really is the apocalypse... just a few weeks late.

 

RE-EDIT: That picture... now my background. Probably the best movie I've seen in a while.

 

RE-RE-EDIT: Also, James Cameron's Avatar... also amazing.

 

1. Hmmm....that's pretty amusing....I'm not, but thanks for asking.

 

2. Your gift is amazing. Please, share it with me sometime.

 

3. I'm so sure....

 

4. I'd say you'd insult a few Germans with that.

 

5. I admire your metaphors

 

6. It's obvious you have no faith in man-kind....then again...neither do I.

 

7. "Why so serious"? Hmmmm....why so curious?

 

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/4/26/b00d02b4-1ab3-4194-8243-204b4ccea37b.jpg

 

so true....

 

8. I don't see how the rest is revelant.

 

9. And OBTW...my input was not bitterness, and sarcasm isn't going to get you anywhere....but this was fun, we should do it again sometime. ;)

Edited June 11, 2011 by Keanumoreira

[marharth]

And who are you?

I'm RZ1029. Nice to meet you, I smell bitterness.

 

Can you see the future now, cause I would big money to see that.

I can, I do and I have. Your shortsightedness is amusing.

You don't know what lies in the future, no one does, we can only predict.

My predictions just happen to be very accurate.

 

People predicted that the world would be destroyed in WWII, but it isn't destroyed now is it?

Depends on whose world. Germans really got the short end of the stick on that one.

 

We may still be picking up the pieces, but it's still around isn't it?

Holding on with duct tape and string, no doubt.

The fact that you're saying countries can't work together is an opinion because you don't know that....that's only what you think. Countries are still working together to this day and fighting as well, yes. But how do you know that things can't get better? The answer? You don't...

Hmm... track records for cooperation: bad. Track records for war: pretty good. Google the phrase "war" and you get: 2,180,000,000 results. Google the phrase "peace" and you get: 743,000,000. One-third the result, even Google knows it's pretty hopeless. If 3/4s prefers war, 3/4ths is well above a majority. See? The interwebz can teach you stuff. Also...

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XBl0qQoEqQY/TSddd6FqwAI/AAAAAAAAAxw/yv_8fiMtKDE/s1600/WhySoSerious.jpg

That is such a freaking awesome picture, just saying.

 

EDIT: Also... ZOMGWTFBBQSAWCE... Marharth and I agreeing? It really is the apocalypse... just a few weeks late.

 

RE-EDIT: That picture... now my background. Probably the best movie I've seen in a while.

 

RE-RE-EDIT: Also, James Cameron's Avatar... also amazing.

 

1. Hmmm....that's pretty amusing....I'm not, but thanks for asking.

 

2. Your gift is amazing. Please, share it with me sometime.

 

3. I'm so sure....

 

4. I'd say you'd insult a few Germans with that.

 

5. I admire your metaphors

 

6. It's obvious you have no faith in man-kind....then again...neither do I.

 

7. "Why so serious"? Hmmmm....why so curious?

 

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/4/26/b00d02b4-1ab3-4194-8243-204b4ccea37b.jpg

 

so true....

 

8. I don't see how the rest is revelant.

 

9. And OBTW...my input was not bitterness, and sarcasm isn't going to get you anywhere....but this was fun, we should do it again sometime. ;)

The future is predicted by looking into the past.

 

If one thing happens a lot more then another thing, it is much more likely that it will happen again.

 

It would have been quite possible for the world to have been destroyed in WW2, we are lucky that Hitler did not get the atomic bomb before us.

 

Not to mention that WW2 would have been massively different if Hitler did not try to invade Russia. (They had a peace treaty during the time of the invasion by the way, just to prove my point further on how treaties don't always work)

 

D-day also made a huge turn on the war.

 

If it wasn't for Hitlers dumb decision to invade Russia, D-day, and the US development of the A-bomb, Hitler would have won.

 

It is completely reasonable to think Hitler would have won the war BEFORE D-day and his invasion of Russia.

 

Curiosity may end up killing a few cats, but it will end up saving a lot more.

Edited June 11, 2011 by marharth

[HeyYou]

The fact that there have been so many wars proves the point that we do not learn from the past. We keep repeating the same mistakes.

 

Hitler made a selection of blunders that cost him the war.

 

Switching target priorities for his bombers from RAF bases, to civilian populations. he had the RAF in southern England on the run, and just about out of the game...... changing his targets allowed them the time they needed to rebuild the bases, and get their air power back on track.

 

ME262: Its a fighter. No, its a bomber. No, its a fighter again. Etc. He developed the first jet powered aircraft, that was FAR faster than any prop driven plane currently on the scene. Had he stuck with using these as fighters, and developed them accordingly, he would have had a serious advantage in bomber escorts...... Or, had he stuck with developing them as bombers..... they wouldn't have needed much of a fighter escort, as they could simply have outrun the prop powered fighters of the day.

 

Russia: That was a major tactical error. Fighting a war on too many fronts. Had he held off on the invasion of Russia, until he had his gains in Europe consolidated, and england basically out of the picture, it would have been a tough slog, but, he might have been a bit more successful.

[marharth]

The fact that there have been so many wars proves the point that we do not learn from the past. We keep repeating the same mistakes.

 

Hitler made a selection of blunders that cost him the war.

 

Switching target priorities for his bombers from RAF bases, to civilian populations. he had the RAF in southern England on the run, and just about out of the game...... changing his targets allowed them the time they needed to rebuild the bases, and get their air power back on track.

 

ME262: Its a fighter. No, its a bomber. No, its a fighter again. Etc. He developed the first jet powered aircraft, that was FAR faster than any prop driven plane currently on the scene. Had he stuck with using these as fighters, and developed them accordingly, he would have had a serious advantage in bomber escorts...... Or, had he stuck with developing them as bombers..... they wouldn't have needed much of a fighter escort, as they could simply have outrun the prop powered fighters of the day.

 

Russia: That was a major tactical error. Fighting a war on too many fronts. Had he held off on the invasion of Russia, until he had his gains in Europe consolidated, and england basically out of the picture, it would have been a tough slog, but, he might have been a bit more successful.

I think he would have won regardless of his other mistakes, if it wasn't for his invasion of Russia.

 

Also as I said above me, treaties can be broken in seconds. His invasion of Russian is perfect proof of that.

[HeyYou]

The fact that there have been so many wars proves the point that we do not learn from the past. We keep repeating the same mistakes.

 

Hitler made a selection of blunders that cost him the war.

 

Switching target priorities for his bombers from RAF bases, to civilian populations. he had the RAF in southern England on the run, and just about out of the game...... changing his targets allowed them the time they needed to rebuild the bases, and get their air power back on track.

 

ME262: Its a fighter. No, its a bomber. No, its a fighter again. Etc. He developed the first jet powered aircraft, that was FAR faster than any prop driven plane currently on the scene. Had he stuck with using these as fighters, and developed them accordingly, he would have had a serious advantage in bomber escorts...... Or, had he stuck with developing them as bombers..... they wouldn't have needed much of a fighter escort, as they could simply have outrun the prop powered fighters of the day.

 

Russia: That was a major tactical error. Fighting a war on too many fronts. Had he held off on the invasion of Russia, until he had his gains in Europe consolidated, and england basically out of the picture, it would have been a tough slog, but, he might have been a bit more successful.

I think he would have won regardless of his other mistakes, if it wasn't for his invasion of Russia.

 

Also as I said above me, treaties can be broken in seconds. His invasion of Russian is perfect proof of that.

 

Treaties are basically meaningless. Just looking at the history of the US, and the various treaties we had with the Indians....... Make a treaty one day, break it the next. Genocide on a grand sale.

[RZ1029]

9. And OBTW...my input was not bitterness,

I know, but sometimes the debates get too serious. I'm here to make sure that doesn't happen.

 

and sarcasm isn't going to get you anywhere....

You have much to learn, my young padawan.

 

but this was fun, we should do it again sometime. ;)

Indeed! How's next Tuesday sound?

 

Also, @marharth: In case you didn't know, marching from Germany to Russia is a little longer than a few seconds. I'd say it took at least a week to break it.

[Keanumoreira]

9. And OBTW...my input was not bitterness,

I know, but sometimes the debates get too serious. I'm here to make sure that doesn't happen.

 

and sarcasm isn't going to get you anywhere....

You have much to learn, my young padawan.

 

but this was fun, we should do it again sometime. ;)

Indeed! How's next Tuesday sound?

 

Also, @marharth: In case you didn't know, marching from Germany to Russia is a little longer than a few seconds. I'd say it took at least a week to break it.

 

That sounds great! Sorry if I was so mean yesterday.....had a bad day. Btw....I'm feel great today! must be the coffee.....