Brasil

My AIM sn is aestenAIM. Feel free to drop me a line. I've been experimenting with a skill lately that I figure isn't really being used too much. Maybe it's the short duration, health sacrifice, and limited range, but Dark Fury (pretty sure that's the one) in Necro Blood is pretty stunning. I've been tinkering with Synergy (see my above posts), and Dark Fury was included in the Necro character's skill set to aid the Warriors in Adrenaline gain. I'm pretty wiped out right now (been pretty sick lately), so I don't have the energy to find the skill description, but the skill basically functions like this: Sacrifice X amount of health, and for 5 seconds, whenever a party member hits with a physical attack, that party member gains one strike of adrenaline. It's an enchantment, duration of 5 seconds, recharge of 5 seconds, energy cost of 5 or 10 I think. The actual description is incorrect, as well. It's not "next time." It's during the entire duration, so I suspect the description will be fixed, rather than the skill being changed, because "next hit" would make Dark Fury pretty useless I think. But I wasn't sure how it'd work in conjunction with charging Warrior Adre skills, so I switched Jade over to N/W (her initial combination before changing at all), loaded my skill bar with a few high Adre Hammer and Sword skills (Final Thrust...10 Adre), then headed out from Yak's Bend. I was also running For Great Justice!, which players seriously need to look at again, because it has a 20 second duration now and it's totally worth it, especially with a Blood Necro supporting you with Dark Fury. I activated FGJ first, then ran up to the Stone Summit along the road. I had equipped Jade with a non-Furious Hammer, by the way. (I've always been leery of using a Furious Hammer, because a 10% chance of gaining one strike of Adre just doesn't seem worth taking up a mod for.) Plus, I wanted to see how the slower swing rate would handle in terms of Adre gain. And let's just say that anyone who says a Furious Hammer is required hasn't examined skill synergy at all. With a combination of For Great Justice and Dark Fury, Final Thrust was charged in 2-3 hits, Hammer Bash in 1-2, you get the idea. We're talking a 10-Adre skill charging in under 3 seconds, essentially...even more if I wanted to use Berserker Stance. A skill like Earth Shaker (AoE KD), at an 8 or 9 Adre cost will charge in no time, making the attack almost spammable, provided everything runs according to plan. I tell ya...Dark Fury is amazing, and it really further establishes Necros as both a Warrior's worst enemy and a Warrior's best friend. And I've been looking at Spell Breaker lately, too. Sounds interesting.

[QUOTE=Chabichou][color=#004a6f]I called the site "reputable" because it's based on research done by scientists. I may not neccesarily agree with it because some of the conclusions they have made from their data might be wrong. As you have argued in your first post. I just assume that others probably have made their own conspiracy theories, and since you can't really trust all resouces on the internet, it's best to turn to those made by scientists and more notably, a university professor. Of course, it is up to the reader to determine whether or not these scientists have a valid point. As I have already said, I have not really read any of the aritcles on the website, just skimmed over them, so I don't really know what they contain. So I never knew that the term "gullible" was used.[/color][/QUOTE] Chabi, that's really, really lame. If you didn't agree with the site's conclusion from the start, then why did you link to it in the first place? You clearly read the site enough (or were familiar with the site's content enough) to be able to paraphrase particular "I find it odd" types of "evidence," and yet you say you didn't really read the site, and you don't really agree with the site's conclusion? I'm sorry, but I'm going to call bull on that one, because the only reason why someone would link to a site like that is if they agreed with what was being said at that site. Anyone who disagreed with such an absurd and lame conspiracy theory would never, ever link to it and claim it holds "reputable information," [i]because it doesn't hold reputable information[/i]. All it has is a bunch of lame conspiracy theorists letting their imaginations overpower common sense. If you didn't agree with the conclusion, why in the hell were you [b]parroting[/b] information from that site, and why in the hell were you referring to that site? Come on. Either you actually believe Operation Pearl, and believe that the American government killed its own civilians in a massive Shadow-Ops, or you mindlessly provided us with a completely irrelevant and useless link that borders on spam within the context of this discussion, simply because you heard one of the "scientists" behind the site speak at your school (and thus just wasted everyone's time instead of actually contributing to the discussion).

[quote name='Chabichou']I just want it made clear that I don't neccesarilly support the conspiracy theory, because I haven't taken the time to read their arguments thoroughly, and actually determine whether their arguments are valid or not.[/quote] If you didn't read through that site you linked to, that you claimed held "reputable information," why in the hell did you link us to that site and claim it held "reputable information"? You don't "necessarily support" the conspiracy theory, yet everything in your previous post points in the direction that you have bought into some lame radical conspiracy theory...without even reading what the conspiracy theory is saying in the first place. And if you hadn't read through the site, what were you quoting? What was your source for the following: [quote=Chabichou][color=#004a6f]But a couple years back though, I went to a conference held by a professor at my university, A. K. Dewdney explaining some conspiricy theories concerning 9/11. He discussed how the two towers could not have collapsed from the planes crashing into due to the fact that the building were constructed from metal that melts at a higher temperature than the temperature at which the plane's fuel combusts, something like that. He also mentioned how it was absolutely impossible for cell phones to work at the altitude the planes were at when they were first hijacked (the scientists tested this out themselves), though there were reports of cell phone calls made from the planes.... He also mentioned how suspiciously conveinient it was that one of the hijackers left a quran with a flight manual behind.... and the hijacker needs to read up in his flight manual at the last minute, why? It was also interesting how rescue workers found a passport for one of the hijackers. This passport somehow survived the crash although it was in the pocket of the hijacker who was in the plane, which crashed into the tower. Funny how it would survive while its owner was completely destroyed.[/color][/quote] Oh, Dewdney? The same guy who was a primary contributor to the Operation Pearl conspiracy theory, the site of which you linked us to, claiming there was "reputable information" there? I think I know what happened here. This guy spoke at your school, and you just bought into the entire thing without actually doing any research about it, and when a discussion comes up regarding it, you figured that you might as well link to the guy's site (because essentially, it's his site, let's be completely frank), because his argument was so convincing years ago that you couldn't possibly need to actually [i]read[/i] the site's content before recommending it to others looking for "reputable information." [quote]It is far more likely that the attack was indeed carried out by arab terrorists than the american government purposely killing it's citizens.[/quote] So if you know this, why in the hell would you even link to Operation Pearl in the first place? One of the major points of Operation Pearl is that the government purposely and deliberately killed its own citizens. Remote control planes? I mean, honestly. Use some common sense here. lol Either you actually do believe in the conspiracy theory and that's why you linked to the site, or you never believed in it, which leads me to wonder why you would even point to Operation Pearl as "reputable information," and why you would be so amazed by Dewdney's presentation years ago.......especially if you don't buy into the conspiracy theory to begin with. And no offense, but I'm leaning toward the former possibility there. No sensible individual would ever believe crap like Operation Pearl, just like no sensible individual would link to it if said individual didn't actually believe it. [quote]Of course you're not gullible. One thing I would like to point out is whether or not Osama was responsible for this is still debatable. Al-Qaida denied the attacks at first, and then later they took responsibility. Why would they do that? Why not take responsibility right away? Were they not proud of what they did? I think it's fairly possible that the attacks were done by someone else, and that Al-Qaida simmply took responsibility for it because they thought it was so great and it would add to their reputation. In palestine for instance, there are so many resistance groups, and sometimes several groups claim they did an attack even though they didn't.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it's called Terrorists rely on--guess what--spreading doubt, fear, and deceit (kind of like the Sith in Star Wars). How does that somehow cast doubt on Bin Laden both claiming responsibility for 9/11 and also being the "mastermind" behind it? Keep in mind that Bin Laden's hands were theorized to be all over the WTC bombing in the 90s, and there has been documentation that he was interested in attacking the U.S. in a manner similar to the destruction seen at the WTC. And yes, I'm not gullible. But according to the site [i]you[/i] linked us to...I [i]am[/i] gullible because I see, understand, and accept the explanation that [i]actually makes sense[/i].

Am I the only one who finds some of this just the least bit laughable? Not so much the Pentagon suspicions, because I hold some of them, as well, but the WTC stuff? I mean, come on. I read architectural studies of the WTC towers that outright refuted what "Operation Pearl" was saying. The towers were strong, absolutely. They were built to withstand a lot of stress. But not the kind of stress that two large Boeing aircraft punching holes in them can introduce. I find it incredibly absurd to see phrases like "This scenario [terrorists] is accepted by gullible people but rejected by realists" are used in this Operation Pearl rubbish, when the clear irony there is that a "realist" wouldn't go spouting off conspiracies like this. Would a "realist" write an entire article/analysis with a very clear motivation to "expose" the "terrorist explanation" as false, yet [u][b][i]frigging open the article[/i][/b][/u] with "This general principle by no means implies that all terrorist attacks are bogus, only that with appropriate resources, any such attack can be simulated"? These people (the conspiracy theorists regarding the WTC) are so concerned with asking questions, eh? Yeah, and there are a few questions they need to ask themselves, like...I don't know... "Is what I'm saying actually making any sense?" "Am I coming off as intelligently questioning my government or just as some nutcase with too much free time and an overactive imagination?" And my personal favorite, "Does my dialogue sound realistic?" Lastly, according to Operation Pearl, the terrorists apparently were lousy pilots, so therefore they couldn't have piloted the planes into the WTC. What I'm wondering is...how [i][u][b]good[/b][/u][/i] of a pilot does someone have to be to [u][i][b]crash[/b][/i][/u] a plane? I really can't believe that the conspiracy theorists label people like me (those with common sense, really) "gullible" because I use common sense, when they're the ones concocting all sorts of bizarre Hitler-esque paranoia scenarios and convincing themselves that's how it actually happened. Just so I get this straight...because I looked at what happened, saw the footage of the WTC towers collapsing LIVE, saw Bin Laden and his group almost frigging take responsibility for 9/11, saw the evidence over the past 8 years that something was boiling in terrorist cells regarding the WTC (anyone remember the first bombing back in the 90s?)...[i]I'm[/i] the [b]gullible[/b] one? I recall someone here saying something about this very same issue a while back, something along the lines of "For the entire thing to have been a conspiracy, I don't think any conspiracy theorists really understand just how complicated the entire thing would have been, and just how many people would have had to been in on it." Op.Pearl states that the cellphone calls were impossible. Something tells me that those family members on the receiving ends of those cellphone calls would say otherwise, or else they were in on the entire thing, as well, which would mean that the government enlisted the aid of regular citizens for a massive Shadow-Ops designed to springboard the nation into a global conflict for what? Acquisition of oil in the middle east, right? Figure since we're talking conspiracy theories, might as well bring in Michael Moore. One of the main reasons the Left is hurting so much in this country is because of lunatics like these conspiracy theorists.

[quote name='persocomblues']more build posting in the future.[/quote] Okay, why not, eh? I've been tinkering with this team build for a few months now, and it was gestating for a few months before that. It's based on a few different observations I've made playing GW, and I suppose in that regard, it represents the culmination of a few different ideas. This build is my baby. ~_^ [quote=Synergy]Guild Wars Team Builder v1.05 TEAM NAME: Quantum Kabuki Troupe BATTLE AREA: GvG/8v8 BUILD DESCRIPTION PvP Synergy TEAM PLAYERS [u]Player 1[/u] Warrior/Elementalist Skill 1: Berserker Stance Skill 2: Mighty Blow Skill 3: Counter Blow Skill 4: Distracting Blow Skill 5: Ward Against Melee Skill 6: Earth Shaker Skill 7: Aftershock Skill 8: Frenzy Hammer Mastery 11 + 3 Strength 10 + 2 Earth Magic 10 + 0 Anti-Warrior: Wields a Shocking Hammer. Follows Air Ele's Glimmering Mark call. Earth Shaker-->Aftershock. Distracting Blow, Counter Blow. Berserker/Frenzy. Caster support: Ward Against Melee [u]Player 2[/u] Warrior/Ranger Skill 1: Berserker Stance Skill 2: Executioner's Strike Skill 3: Penetrating Blow Skill 4: Cyclone Axe Skill 5: Tiger's Fury Skill 6: Disrupting Chop Skill 7: Eviscerate Skill 8: Apply Poison Axe Mastery 11 + 0 Strength 9 + 0 Beast Mastery 10 + 0 Wilderness Survival 4 + 0 Axe Warrior. Executioner, Cyclone. Tiger's Furry. Apply Poison. Disrupting Chop. Damage output. [u]Player 3[/u] Elementalist/Mesmer Skill 1: Air Attunement Skill 2: Lightning Strike Skill 3: Lightning Orb Skill 4: Chain Lightning Skill 5: Lightning Javelin Skill 6: Glimmering Mark Skill 7: Windborne Speed Skill 8: Mantra of Concentration Air Magic 12 + 4 Energy Storage 12 + 2 Inspiration Magic 3 + 0 Air Spiker. Glimmering Mark. Channeling. Mantra of Concentration. Air Attunement. [u]Player 4[/u] Necromancer/Mesmer Skill 1: Enfeebling Blood Skill 2: Shadow of Fear Skill 3: Suffering Skill 4: Faintheartedness Skill 5: Feast of Corruption Skill 6: Sympathetic Visage Skill 7: Dark Fury Skill 8: Blood Ritual Blood Magic 3 + 0 Curses 12 + 4 Illusion Magic 12 + 0 Anti-Warrior: Enfeebling Blood. Shadow of Fear. Suffering. Faintheartedness. Feast of Corruption {E}. Caster support: Sympathetic Visage. Blood Rit. Warrior support: Dark Fury. [u]Player 5[/u] Mesmer/Necromancer Skill 1: Power Spike Skill 2: Power Leak Skill 3: Cry of Frustration Skill 4: Shame Skill 5: Mantra of Recovery Skill 6: Arcane Mimicry Skill 7: Backfire Skill 8: Well of the Profane Domination Magic 11 + 4 Fast Casting 12 + 3 Death Magic 6 + 0 Anti-Caster/Interrupts. Power Spike, Power Leak, CoF. Shame. Backfire. Enchant Suppression: Well of the Profane Arcane Mimicry for Ranger/Mes Power Block. Fevered Dreams {E} [u]Player 6[/u] Ranger/Mesmer Skill 1: Lightning Reflexes Skill 2: Savage Shot Skill 3: Distracting Shot Skill 4: Concussion Shot Skill 5: Power Leak Skill 6: Power Spike Skill 7: Power Block Skill 8: Cry of Frustration Marksmanship 10 + 3 Expertise 11 + 3 Domination Magic 10 + 0 Anti-Caster/Interrupts. Savage Shot, Distracting Shot, Concussion Shot. Power Leak/Spike/Block. CoF. [u]Player 7[/u] Monk/Mesmer Skill 1: None Skill 2: None Skill 3: None Skill 4: None Skill 5: None Skill 6: Remove Hex Skill 7: Shatter Hex Skill 8: Hex Breaker Healing Prayers 10 + 2 Divine Favor 8 + 3 Domination Magic 12 + 0 Monk Healing; Remove Hex, Shatter Hex, Hex Breaker [u]Player 8[/u] Monk/Mesmer Skill 1: None Skill 2: None Skill 3: None Skill 4: None Skill 5: None Skill 6: Mend Condition Skill 7: Mend Ailment Skill 8: Hex Breaker Protection Prayers 10 + 2 Divine Favor 8 + 3 Domination Magic 12 + 0 Monk Prot; Mend Condition, Mend Ailment, Hex Breaker[/quote]

I side with Kong, because Peter Jackson is remaking the original King Kong (1933), a version that included the same fight with the same results, plus in a movie about King Kong, with the ape being King Kong, you wouldn't exactly have him die...because then you'd have no movie. Kong all the way.

Yeah, our cape went through three different color coordinations. Originally, we had a purple background/white emblem. It was pretty nice, and very bouncy. It caught people's attention, definitely. When Halloween rolled around, I approached James about doing a special Halloween color theme. He was cool with it, and I donated the 2k. Those colors were a goldish/orange emblem on a black background. Looked wicked. After Halloween was over (and after James got back from vacation), the cape changed again, but keeping the Halloween cape shape (the torn, tattered thing). The colors were changed to a white emblem on the black background. And it looks very schway. I was recently goofing around in the Competition Arenas, playing an Illusion/Domination build as Jade, and I think I'm going to start figuring out how that type of build would work best universally. Jade, as many of you know, is a Necro, so I couldn't have that build working at full potential. Leah, on the other hand, is a primary Mesmer, so I may look at getting a run to Droks to gather a few skills. I think the skill I'm most fond of in that build is Sympathetic Visage. In a 4v4 battle, I got targeted by two Warriors, cast Symp. Visage on myself, and within a second, they stopped attacking me. I'm definitely interested in pursuing an Illusion-based build now.

The way I see it...if I go to some random anime expo, I'm not dressing as quasi-mentally handicapped cartoon characters. There are enough of those in the shows (and then out on the expo floors). Dressing up like whoever Kagimi, Shagoma, whatever--because they're all the same character, let's be honest, lol--will guarantee two things: One, I'm going to laugh at you and point. And two, I'm going to dress as Darth Vader and Force-Choke your -ss. Or just choke you in the general, physical sense of the word. I can understand being a fan of a series or show, or movie or whatever, because I'm a big Star Wars fan, and a big fan of the old Star Trek series, and various other sci-fi franchises, but I draw the line at a certain point, and I think oogling over some fictional character from any fictional work is crossing that line. I think the best example of my thoughts on the matter is the Triumph the Insult Comic Dog's segment on Late Night with Conan O'Brien where Triumph insults a whole bunch of Star Wars nerds, then has Spock flip them off at the end. Because, really, isn't that what life's all about in the end? Flipping off the personality-doomed and terminally (social) life-less? I mean...I certainly wouldn't mind introducing some of those nerds' behinds to their fake, plastic extendo-sabers paperclipped to their leather/felt belts. And to answer the question...fangirls (and boys) are neither weird nor scary. They're just reasons why mercy killings should be legal.

I don't really mind, I think. If a gay guy found me attractive, w00t! That means I'm not only sexy to women. In some ways, it's flattering. I wouldn't flirt back or anything, and I'd let him know what's going on, but I wouldn't be mean about it, either, similar to Manic. Of course...that's all dependent on if I realize I'm getting hit on (I'm very dense sometimes lol). Annie and I had an interesting time in New Paltz, New York, that's for sure. ~_^

We're having some difficulties sending out guild invites. Please make sure of the following: 1) You currently are not in a guild. 2) You're on the American servers. (instructions on switching are below) To change servers, log in, go to "Edit Account," then "Change Territory." You can only change territories a max of 5 times, so make sure you get it right. ~_^ We're on the American server (it may be called North America).

The guild's main focus right now is PvE, I'd say, because our membership isn't equipped properly for PvP. I have a feeling we'd be pretty rusty in terms of PvP/GvG. With the Holiday breaks coming up, though, hopefully we can get some action. ~_^ That's not to say we can't do PvP, though. Most of the active members have done it fairly often in the past (one of our Members is a PvP addict, lol, and I hop into Arenas every now and again), so we know our way around it. It's just a timing issue I think. Schedules are hectic. Regarding types of characters to create...that's entirely up to you. We have a pretty solid variety now, I think, although with the inactive members lately, we might need to replenish some of the professions. Off the top of my head, I think Warriors, Elementalists, and Rangers are what we need the most. Probably a Mesmer or two, as well.

[QUOTE=Shinji][size=1][color=crimson] This point is itneresting, because I'm not too sure that MAD is completely outmoded in any regard. Say, for example, the administration threatened to nuke off Baghdad, and maybe Tehran if the terrorists did not stop, the terrorists in turn threaten to call a worldwide Jihad to erase the infidels, would any side make a move? Would the administration nuke the cities knwoing full well it would be the catalyst for a global jihad? And then, would the terroists call for a global jihad if that meant the annihilation of a good sized portion of the Middle East? I don't neccessarily think that being all for martyrdom means that they wouldn't give two hoots about their demise, I'm sure the terrorists woudl have in mind that nuclear strikes for their region, any region at all, woudl be catastrophic. It won't happen anyway, I don't think the Bush administration would have the support, nor the tenacity, to hang that little mistletoe over the insurgents heads. It's not so much a vote for war to end war as a vote for MAD to cease war, if that makes sense. [/color][/size][/QUOTE] Shinji, I just consider what we've seen over the past thirty years. If you examine the developments of the Cold War and compare them to the recent developments in the "War on Terror," you're going to see very distinct differences in the respective approaches of the USSR and Al Qaeda, and with little to no change in our own capabilities. If anything, the US has only become more lethal since then. I think the Gulf War's "smart bombs" is testament to that we don't have to use the (by comparison) clunky targeting systems of the past. Now, if the USSR was any example of a smart adversary (one who recognizes MAD), then any other adversary deviating from that model either is not intelligent, or for some reason, just doesn't care about MAD. Now, if the US has only become more lethal over the past few decades, and groups like Al Qaeda have routinely pulled things like 9/11, suicide bombings in Iraq, Israel, etc...what does that say about those terrorist groups? We have more than enough technology to destroy them--and they know it. And yet they continue to attack. We had the weapons to destroy the Earth back in the Cold War. That's why the USSR didn't attack. They'd be destroying their own country in the process. We have the weapons to destroy the Earth now. But terrorists still have not stopped. I think that's party due to they believe they'll be rewarded with 70 virgins when they die, and also...they have no country to destroy. For all intents and purposes, they're "hit and runs" on a global scale, with scattered bases of operations. So, I don't think MAD is a deterrent here at all. They're already willing to die for their cause. Talking about Mutal Assured Destruction wouldn't have any effect. "Surrender or else we'll destroy [insert area here]" doesn't exactly sound like it'll hit them where it hurts.

[QUOTE=Outlaw]I'm confused by this point. I can only assume you are citing this instance as an example of governments being in touch with their soldiers, as Truman claims he used the bomb to save hundreds of thousands of soldiers lives. Now, I'm going to have to disagree with you, seeing as I take the 'bomb wasn't necessary' side of the arguement. One reason I have come to this conclusion is the fact that General Douglas MacArthur, the head of the US Pacific War Effort during this period, along with soon to be president Eisenhower, denied the nessecity of the bomb. Both beleived that Japan was essential defeated already, and that the bomb was dropped cheifly to intimidate the Russians, anticipating the eventual Cold War. Another is a reportfrom the committee of scientists designated to find a proper place to drop the bomb. They chose Nagasaki and Hiroshima mainly on a scientific bases, hoping to study the effects of such weapons on massive urban settings. They also cited the fact that they could study the effects the surrounding mountain ranges would have on the blast in chosing their cities. I don't have a copy of the report on hand, but I'll try and find it. I know this is off topic, but I'm a big fan of the Bomb arguement.[/QUOTE] My point was that Truman weighed his options there. Either invade Japan and suffer the loss of many, many, many Americans, or drop the bomb. Your two suggestions are interesting, but I think best left to conspiracy theorists, because from what I've read/heard/etc., there was nothing to suggest that's what influenced Truman's decision. Anyone who says that Japan was "essentially defeated" clearly hasn't studied the Pacific theatre of the time...even those saying being actual generals for the US at the time. There were subterranean passages in some of the islands, so instead of there only being 15,000 soldiers on that island, there were actually closer to 30,000. The Japanese were trained to fight to the death. When we're talking about Imperalistic militaries, Japan ranks pretty high. We're talking complete and total dedication to the cause. To this day, you can still read rumored reports of soldiers in hiding. As I recall, there was one Japanese soldier discovered a few decades ago, still believing the war was raging. The Emperor was basically a god, and if he did not back down, his people would not back down. I'm sorry, man, but the facts, the evidence and the logistics are there to support what we know regarding Truman's reasoning. All else is pure speculation that borders on conspiracy theory.

[QUOTE=king_monkey]this is because the leaders have lost touch with there humanity they dont actually see the gruelling of the battlefield so they'er numb to all the killing they dont send there sons/daughters to the killing grounds, wonder why? :animesigh[/QUOTE] I'm calling bull on that one, and advise you to do some study of the Cold War era at the very least, and then read-up on the events that led to President Truman's decision to use the A-Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki near the end of WWII. Leaders losing touch with their humanity? Please. Get out of here with that rubbish. As much as I dislike the current administration, and as much as I feel they're incompetent...I'm not about to say they've lost touch with their humanity (not in this context, at least). Dude, get a fricking clue and then post again, because right now, you're talking absolute nonsense.

[quote name='Tigervx][color=Teal][size=1]It?s the very threat of annihilation that we use for war that will eventually shield us from using these weapons. [/size'][/color][/quote] And this is precisely why "peace from war" makes the most sense. Thank you, Tiger. People...get with the program, please. All of you talking about love solves everything are so blinded by that notion that you can't see the actual context of this topic. If there is one example of a "peace" in the last century, it's the Cold War. The United States and the Soviet Union did not engage in global thermonuclear war for a reason. That reason was not because they loved each other, or because they were mildly fond of each other, or because they were on speaking terms. We didn't see worldwide annihilation during the Cuban Missile Crisis because any attack from either side would result in complete destruction. To put it really simple: [u][b]Love does not prevent war, nor does it create peace. Mutual Assured Destruction prevents war, and it creates peace.[/b][/u] The reason why we fight today is because with the various new terrorist cells that have popped up "recently," MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction - learn about it) has become outdated. These terrorists don't give two ****s about destroying themselves--because they're already martyring with suicide bombings. You eliminate the lunatics, you achieve peace, simple as that. A final note, quite frankly, not to sound harsh or anything, any of you claiming to be in the military and spouting this "do it for peace, war isn't the answer" nonsense ought to be ashamed of yourselves, because in saying what you're saying...you're betraying a complete ignorance of the intricacies and subtleties of global conflict of the past 50 years. Pull your heads out of your rear ends.

I don't really view Jordan's sarcasm as unwarranted, though, especially for a question/poll such as this. I mean, we're talking about two extremes here, let's be honest. There's either "peace through war" or "peace through love." We're given two options, and required to choose one? I don't necessarily agree with either of them, but "peace through love" is a communal, hippie-esque distortion of Christ's original message that was irrelevant back in the 60s, just like it's irrelevant now--at least irrelevant on the global scale. Just the current geopolitical foundation in this day and age invalidates the entire viewpoint of peace through love. And when it all comes down to it, peace through war (in the context of this poll) is just a more sensible and responsible choice, as bizarre as that may seem to some. So, given all of that...how does anyone expect someone like me or Jordan to really take this seriously? lol. Any sensible person would realize that "peace through love" is a pretty lame idea lately. As a brief footnote, I'm bothered by the relative speed with which some here have already started using the term "war-monger." Just because someone understands, and most importantly recognizes, the downright uselessness of the "peace through love" concept does not mean they're some hawk all of a sudden, looking to snatch up a dove. "War-monger" largely is a term from one extreme viewpoint's knee-jerk reaction to an opposing extreme viewpoint, and I think "War-monger" holds the same relevance as say..."Bleeding-heart Liberal" or "Anti-American." And that is to say, it doesn't hold much relevance at all in the first place. It's just a loaded word spurned on by partisan bull****.

I voted war because I feel "peace through love" (particularly on a global scale) is trite and naive. Day-to-day life, on an individual level, peace through love? Absolutely. It's laughable, however, to entertain the idea of a global love for all mankind.

For those of you who don't know who Ann Coulter is, run a Google search for her. She's a Republican nutjob blonde woman who's incredibly mean-spirited. And she sounds like some serpent when she speaks. The question for this poll is exceedingly random, but random questions are what I do most of the time. I've seen Ann Coulter on various shows on MSNBC and FoxNews, and I wonder what she's like in bed, because she seems incredibly cold and unfeeling (and most importantly, non-sexual) on those "talking heads" shows. So which do you think, based on what you know about her? Is she an animal in bed or a glacier? And then, if you would be so kind, give your thoughts on the theatrics of the political arena in general? What do you think about performances in politics, certain people playing certain roles, etc? I suppose it's similar to professional wrestling in that regard. Does Bill O'Reilly look to The Undertaker for his characterization? Can a parallel be drawn between Hulk Hogan and Karl Rove? And does Jesse Ventura model his political career on...uh...his former wrestling career? ~_^

With Black Friday, the start of December, and my finals for the Fall semester all breathing down my neck, I figured it was that time of year again for... [center][img]http://img42.exs.cx/img42/5926/OBXmasListImage2004.jpg[/img] [left] Now, I asked James if posting this thread was Kosher, given that there's a Christmas List thread in OL right now, and he was cool with it. So what's at the top of everyone's "Hit" lists? What games in particular? What systems, perhaps? Peripherals? Originally, I was asking for a Nintendo DS this year, but then I realized that the likelihood of getting the Mario Kart/DS bundle in the upcoming months was probably going to be incredibly, incredibly slim. I hear of Gamestops being sold out (of just the MKDS game itself, no less) and that really sucks. So...I pre-ordered the bundle from Gamestop.com and with any luck, I'll have my DS the week after Thanksgiving. I suppose I'm thankful for my credit card and Gamestop.com? ~_^ With the DS off my list, that freed up my options a lot, but I'm finding that there are only a few new releases that I [i]really[/i] want; other titles are older, some over a year. The new releases are almost entirely DS titles. I've always been a fan of RTS and turn-based strategy games, and feel right at home with Shining Force on Genesis. I dig tactical stuff like that, with the exception of Final Fantasy Tactics. Same format, but I couldn't stand it. Go figure. I suppose the bad taste from FFT is really what made me leery of jumping into [i]Advance Wars: Dual Strike[/i], and even though it had gotten stellar reviews and recommendations from both the industry and my friends around here, I never felt confident enough to take the plunge, as it were. The Gamestop demo of Advance Wars: Dual Strike changed that. ^_^ The game is amazing and incredibly engaging. The use of the stylus to control units was second nature and I could see a Command & Conquer game working very well, especially given the Wi-Fi capabilities of the DS. Advance Wars was unbelievable, largely due to how intuitive the stylus control was. In a matter of seconds, I was directing the carnage without a second thought as to "how" I move that unit. The "why" and "to where" I move that unit were still critical decisions, of course, because the A.I. was pretty solid. Actually having to plan a strategy of attack and coordinate a strike as to avoid my forces getting decimated was lovely. All around, the game is worth it, and after having finally played it a few weeks ago, I kick myself for not getting in on a DS sooner, because I think Advance Wars is one of those titles that really demonstrates how the DS' features can be utilized. Also on my list is [i]Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney[/i]. I love lame humor, and from what I've seen in previews, commercials, reviews, and from Charles and Tony online, the game is hilarious. The premise itself is so bizarre and quirky that it seems the game is almost guaranteed to be entertaining. "HOLD IT!" and "OBJECTION!" from the commercials have stuck in my head for months now, because it's just so unexpected, particularly the over-dramaticized reactions. It's a game that I hear everyone should at least try, and I've been told it's right up my alley, so I'm hoping to get litigious come December 25th. I had heard that the [i]Megaman X Collection[/i] was going to appear on Xbox in December, but I only see PS2 and Gamecube editions listed now. Buggers. I had bought a SNES this past summer, and got about a dozen games with it (good deal!), including Megaman X. I've always been a fan of the Megaman games; I probably was the one responsible for wearing out the copies at a local rental place back in the early 90s, lol. But being a Genesis Kid, I never experienced the X series (or really, anything on SNES). When I played Megaman X, I was really impressed. The game mechanics were very schway, and the originals seem terribly basic in comparison. The wall jumps, the slides, and the suit upgrades all made X something different. Granted, there were various additions like those in the later NES entries, but X utilized them much better, I think. The gameplay felt great in X, and I'd love to play the other X titles without having to root through the dirty underbelly of eBay, heh. In some respects, Megaman X is fun because it still is classic Megaman at its core. The fundamental gameplay hasn't changed, and you can't go wrong with classic Megaman. Here's hoping the X Collection gets an Xbox edition. Two titles that for too long, I've held off on getting are [i]Pikmin 2[/i] and [i]Viewtiful Joe 1[/i]. I recently rented VJ and my experience with it was much more delightful than a year or two ago. I'm not exactly sure why, but I can only guess I was in the right mood when I played it the second time. First time, I enjoyed it, but something didn't click. But when it does click, sweet zombie Jesus. The game kind of opens up for you and the innovation and just downright originality slap you in the face. It's an incredible title and you can find it for 10 bucks in some places. The sense of humor is really lame and cheesy in a film noir, superhero-gone-wrong pulp type of way, so nerds certainly feel right at home. I know I did. lol. VJ is basically a film nerd's wet dream, especially if you're a fan of true post-modern humor. The game is very aware of itself the entire time, but avoids making a huge spectacle of it to the point of just being annoying. It's very refreshing. I had played Pikmin 2 a while back and loved it. It expanded and improved upon the original in just about every way possible, I think. The new Pikmin were fantastic (feeding the white ones to an enemy...very satisfying). The "cooperative" gameplay opened up new strategies. Pikmin 2 should have owned my soul. Come Christmas, it hopefully will. Last on my list so far is [i]Ninja Gaiden: Black[/i], which is a weird choice for me, given that I couldn't really stand the original version from a few years ago. I'm thinking it was similar to Viewtiful Joe, that I just wasn't in the mood for the gameplay type. Of course, the lame camera might have had something to do with it, too. I probably would have enjoyed Ninja Gaiden a lot more had the camera not zoomed in on Ryu's head whenever possible. From what I hear, Black addresses that by including the manual camera control option found in the Hurricane Pack update, in addition to loads of new content, so that'll give me plenty to do. I played Black at an EB Games a few weeks ago, and it was fun as hell. I was actually enjoying myself, and that pretty much clinched it. The controls were tight as hell, the visuals were still amazing, the combat was fast and bloody...a solid gaming experience. Ninja Gaiden Black isn't for everyone (Xbox Ninja Gaiden 1 was barely for me, lol), but it's hard, it's brutal, it's fast, and most importantly, it's damn fun. Highly recommend it. [/left] [/center]

Has anyone been following the recent political chaos? I've been keeping up with some of it here and there, the "Scooter" Libby indictment, motions in the Senate and House, the VP office clouds...I don't even think partisan politics play a role here anymore. I've been Centrist for a while and I can't believe the storm that's brewing over the past few weeks. I've got work now, but I'd be interested to hear your reactions if you've been paying attention to the news.

[quote name='Gavin][size=1']in the same way myself, Josh and Alex were.[/size][/quote] I'm craving another hit. The high is wearing off. We need stronger spoiler tags, Des...I can't even taste it on my lips anymore. Or my teeth.

[quote name='Lafleur']Why not? During the flashback, the science area has light moodlightting, and then it's perfectly dark the rest of the fi;m. There were a few places that were well lit, like the med bay, but the rest of the place looked to be dark before the whole genetic mutation thing.[/quote] Ever hear of a photography dark room? I don't think it's such a big deal that certain lab areas were darker than others, because it's entirely plausible that the lab would operate under similar (though not identical to) procedures you would find in photolabs. [quote]What's to watch? Destroyer was a shoot-first-ask-questions-later kind of guy, *Frogot the other dude's name* just wanted to sleep with women... Who do you think is the evil one?[/quote] A Marine who enjoys to shoot things (Destroyer) and a Marine who enjoys the ladies (Duke) do not belong in the same category as say, Goat or Portman. Destroyer liked to kill things. That doesn't mean he's psychotic. Duke liked the ladies. That doesn't mean he's psychotic. Goat on the other hand? What did he do when he took the Lord's name in vain? That is heavily psychotic. Or Portman? What was he looking to do on leave? Or, hell, remember his "We're on a strict Level 5 Quarantine..." bit? No plot-holes. lol [quote]I don't care what they explain to me, I care about it not making sense. I seem to remember the ARK beign Martian in nature - what, did they discover tihs floating ball of mercury and throw people through it to see if it led anywhere? And send them with building materials to construct a fully-operational space station? Your right, it isn't fully explained - but maybe that's because it isn't fully explainable.[/quote] Or maybe it is fully explainable--if the characters actually knew how to fully explain it. Remember there [i]are[/i] partial explanations during the movie, particularly from Sam and John. Your point here reminds me of all the people who took issue with certain elements of Spielberg's War of the Worlds; because something isn't explained at all in a movie that closely follows the limited perspective of the characters, that something must be some type of plot-hole. [quote]700 people, all of which are supposedly super-smart scientest people, can't think enough to pick up a gun prior to the things arrival? I mean if they knew somthing was happening on the other side, especially if they got that message from whatshisface, wouldn't you think they'd be armed?[/quote] Portman wasn't sending the message to the [i]science[/i] facility on the home side of the ARK; he was requesting back-up from the [i]military[/i]. I wouldn't be surprised if he was operating on the military's broadcast frequency, rather than sending the message to a bunch of labcoats. [quote]Pinky said that the thing cut through the door and he had to go through the ARK because it came at him to fast... right? So he had to jump through the portal-thing, and somhow get his gimpy *** into a pile of corpses that... were there before he got there? How could he survive the slaughter if he was coming through at the same time. It makes very little if no sense at all.[/quote] He goes through the ARK a second or two before the creature gets through. He tries to find cover during the carnage, but is ultimately unsuccessful, getting flung around and happens to land near a pile of bodies. He manages to wriggle himself into it, while the beastie goes off into the other parts of the lab. A few moments later, the Marines come through. You just need to think about the timing of it, because you don't have to stretch your imagination to guess what happens. [quote]Why not? Because it doesn't make sense for them all to gather in one spot. Behind a sealed door, no less. What, are all the people with the evil gene relegated to one section? Because I don't seem to recall any in the first few rooms... [/quote] It's carnage. We're talking about complete dismemberment, death, destruction. Panic. There is no sense to begin with. [quote]I could understand if it just didn't work at all. But if it was half-closed or whatever you call what it did, if it was doing that it wouldn't make much sense... Things don't just sorta-work, they either work or they don't.[/quote] Remember what Sarge said about their mission, then watch the scene again. The Nano-door is either active or inactive, correct. And it was active, with no way to "close" it again. And when the Nano-door is active, it's translucent. When it's translucent, you can slightly see through it, and things can go through it. It's almost completely opaque when it's "closed." There's no plot-hole here. [quote]There is a split-second shot before Duke goes down that shows a pair of hands - human hands - reaching up through the grate, and rapping their hands around his ankles. They don't pull him down right away, they have a little drematic pause, and down he goes.[/quote] Like I said before, the human skull (the scene with Goat) reacts much, much differently than the rest of the human body to blunt contact--and tearing through steel grating isn't the same type of contact as Goat's infatuation with that window. I don't see any problems with Duke's curtain call...because there are no problems with his curtain call. [quote]Hmm... you may be right there.[/quote] And other places, too. [quote]Hah, most of my rant was half-jokingly. When I see a movie I dislike, I tend to blow up the little things because I find it funny. Just somthing I do when I'm bored. DOOM was a pretty bad movie though...[/QUOTE] Okay... And I agree. Doom was awful. But criticize it for things you can actually criticize it for. lol

It's late, but I'll humor you. [quote name='Lafleur][spoiler']One: Why in the hell can they get all the way to Mars and not install one freaking Lightbulb? The reception area and the living area is all perfectly well lit! But the Science Area, where all the reserch takes place, is pitch ******* dark! Even in the flashback before the whole thing started it was pitch black![/spoiler][/quote] You needed to watch the movie more closely. Had you watched it more closely, you wouldn't be complaining about this. [quote][spoiler]Two: Why the hell does a man nicknamed 'Destroyer' (Who is in live with his chaingun, no less!) not posses this evil gene, while some nervous freak/womanizer dude does? It doesn't add up! You'd expect an evil gene to cause evil! Or what about Goat? Was it mere retarded plot-hole or a veiled stab at Christians? Why does he posses this evil gene, he doesn't do anything wrong! While we're on the subject of Goat, how come his light goes out for 'some reason'? I mean maybe if they made it so those things give off a electricity-nullifying aura, but they dont't! WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?[/spoiler][/quote] Again, [i]watch the movie more closely[/i] and actually think about it. If you just paid attention, you wouldn't be ranting about this, because your complaints here are very nit-picky when they're not completely explained by the movie to begin with. [quote][spoiler]Three: How did they build that ******* base on Mars? Don't they transport there by getting sucked into a floating ball of mercury? What, did they discover this floating thing and throw people through it randomly in various forms of protection in hopes they'd return one day with a fully-operational spacestation waiting on the other side? Even the PC version made more sense, they flew there![/spoiler][/quote] And what did the characters know about the entire thing? Not much. How can you expect explanation when the characters themselves aren't entirely sure? Come on. You're nit-picking to the nth degree here. lol And remember that it was a rather long and bumpy process, too. *indicates to Pinky* [quote][spoiler]Four: WHY DOES EVERYONE SUCK SO MUCH ***! Once the thing saws (Saws? It never really clarifies how the thing cut a perfect shape into the door) through the door and gets to Earth (BTW, how did Pinky get through the portal before that thing got him? And even then, how did he survive the slaughter that followed?) why does EVERYONE DIE. It takes a minuet to kill 700 people! WHY ARE NONE OF THEM ARMED? THEY KNOW THAT SOMTHING STUPID HAPPENED ON THE OTHER SIDE, DON'T THEY HAVE SOME KIND OF BACKUP PLAN? Also, the Rock says that the thing sabatoged the computer because it was a 'rocket scientest'. THE ROCKET SCIENTEST IS DEAD! ITS A MINDLESS KILLING MACHINE! EVEN THEN, ITS AN ANTHROPOLOGIST/ARCHEAOLOGIST, NOT A ROCKET SCIENTEST![/spoiler][/quote] I find myself wondering what does any of this matter? You're talking about regular people versus supermonsters. Honestly, do you think the fight was going to be fair? Or slow and drawn-out? The "rocket scientist" line was meant as a joke. I sincerely doubt it was to be taken as seriously as you're seeing it. I doubt it because I watched the movie and paid attention...what little attention was required. And...when you're hiding in a pile of corpses, you tend to be perceived as a corpse yourself. I don't see how your criticism there is all that valid. [quote][spoiler]Five: Why is it that, on Earth, all of the turned humans are in one area? It's like Resident Evil all over again! They walk through the whole tihng and its empty... but open one door, and BAM! 100,000 ******* zombies just waiting for you! Besides, why doesn't the Nano-door close? It just doesn't... right... Plus Duke gets pulled down through the grate! What are they made of, aluminum? Goat can't even break through glass and this thing can tear apart metal? What?[/spoiler][/quote] Why not, though? Open door, "oh shiite!" Given that Goat doesn't take more than a few minutes, what makes you think it's so impossible for a group? The shot that destroys your criticism of the Nano-door not closing is a few seconds long and involves the Nano-door's control panel. Look for it. What makes you think Duke got attacked by a zombie, anyway? There's no evidence at all in that entire sequence that that's what got him, and given the strength of some of the monsters in the film...come on; I think it's perfectly reasonable things can tear through metal. lol. And Goat was, for all intents and purposes, still a human body during that glass window part. The human body (particularly the skull) does not respond well to that kind of contact. [quote][spoiler]The Destroyer vs DOOM Thing fist fight was actualy pretty fun to watch. But it was complete crap. Destroyer is a soldier, correct? He has this thing pinned againts the lightning wall, correct? WHY DOES HE RUN? He could have broken the things neck and ended it right there... but no! I'm gona climb some chain thing. Why does he even go there anyway? Didn't Rock say to stay by the door?[/spoiler][/quote] Think about it: it's clear the beasty conducts electricity. The rod he used is made of metal. Metal conducts electricity. The walls are electrified. Why didn't he break the thing's neck when it was pinned by a metal rod, against a metal, electrified wall, with what seemed to be high voltage running through everything? Dude, come on. You do the math. [quote]I'm a harsh critic, but anyone who watched this movie knows what I mean - it made no ******* sense! NONE![/QUOTE] No offense, but most of your "criticisms" missed parts of the movie. Let's hope the Spoiler tags worked correctly.

School uniforms are lame solutions to a problem that ultimately comes down to something as simple as students dressing within reason. That's the focal point of the issue. Some students don't dress within reason--and dressing within reason, as far as I'm concerned, is not difficult at all. A girl wearing a sheer, see-through top with what isn't really considered a bra in most societies is certainly [i]not[/i] dressing within any reasonable limits. That much should just be common sense. I don't need to see someone's *** because their pants are hanging too low, just like I don't need to see nipples every single time a girl brushes up against her shirt incorrectly. I think limits (for public schools, at least) are definitely a good idea, but school uniforms are just exceedingly unnecessary when all the solution comes down to is needing to set reasonable limits for attire and penalizing students who still violate those limits. Because, as far as I'm concerned, requiring students to dress in unsoiled, untorn, untattered, non-over-revealing clothing is not requesting them to suddenly forgo whoever the hell it is they're trying to be. College, it's different. You kind of expect to see some thong-age every now and again, stuff like that. I don't even see the likelihood of a dress code on the collegiate level, too, because college is largely an uncontrolled student body; students come and go as they please, so a dress could would be ridiculously hard to enforce. But really, what kind of dress code are we talking about enforcing anyway? Seems like just common sense. So...I'd rather people use common sense when deciding what to wear. Navy blue Dockers and light blue Polo shirts are just totally lame solutions.

Why not reply? Okay, so the parental units were visiting the brother this past weekend. I had work, so I couldn't drive 7 hours out to Pittsburgh with them. Now, with my girlfriend staying at Rowan this past weekend, I had pretty much nothing to do, apart from work and schoolwork/studying. I can't have that. I check the local movie listings and lo and behold, there's a 10:45 pm showing of Doom at the usual theatre my friends and I frequent. I give Alec (Final Remix on OB) a call and tell him what's going on Saturday. He's game, then I call up Mary, a friend of ours. She's...okay with going to see it. Alec and I had the following to say as we were leaving the theatre after the movie: [center][size=3][color=DarkRed][i][b]Sweet zombie Jesus that was awful!![/b][/i][/color][/size] [/center] The weirdest thing was that we were laughing our ***** off as we left. I don't think there was a span of more than five minutes where we weren't. The movie was probably one of the worst things I've ever seen. The dialogue was generally exceedingly lame (though the "You gonna shoot me" exchange was priceless), the characterization was...non-existent. But the action sequences were very well done, and overall, I think the movie stays exceedingly true to the game, except for the lack of a true Hell story. Although, there is a hint of spirituality throughout the film, so it's not as if there's a complete lack of "ultimate evil." In retrospect, they handled "evil" pretty well, albeit in a lame "the last 10% of the human genome may very well be the soul" sort of way. Most of the movie was pretty painful, even for videogame nerds. Incidentally...the movie is strictly for videogame nerds only, and even then, some may be pissed off. As far as I'm concerned, though, we've got Doom music playing pretty much all the way through--and it's fantastic during the major set pieces. The cinematography was surprisingly good; they did some pretty innovative transitions, particularly the transition into the FPS portion of the film. And any movie that features a mutated Rock going "Semper Fi, motherf-cker" has got to be a good time. So, if you want to have fun at the movies--and most importantly, if you're going with a group of really nerdy friends with dorkish senses of humor, who laugh at all sorts of gratuitous violence--I'd recommend Doom. It's probably the funniest thing I've seen all year, although Sky High was pretty damn funny, too. Though, Doom is a more "Oh my God did you see that?!?!" type of funny.