which is the most civilsed nation on earth?

[ledhed]

So your a zero eh ? can we call you " Zeke " ?

 

[a6m5]

So your a zero eh ? can we call you " Zeke " ?

That sounds pretty cool, actually. I hope I don't offend anybody with the "a6m5". I just chose it, because I love airplanes and love its' design, not the "purpose".

 

[ledhed]

You dont have to give a riesen for your name ...
It took a while to catch on ... I was looking for the model des. for the shorter range version made later in the war ..the one that actually had self sealing tanks and some armor.. Thats what made it strike me as funny..or something ..hehehe at any rate I noticed it .
Well to get back on topic maybe we should set up a poll on the most UN - civilized country in the world . That IMO would be a lot harder to figure out. Although if you go strictly by manners it would be France in a landslide..hehehe..

 

[a6m5]

Well to get back on topic maybe we should set up a poll on the most UN - civilized country in the world . That IMO would be a lot harder to figure out. Although if you go strictly by manners it would be France in a landslide..hehehe..

I'm sure it will be close to the top.

ledhed: I thought you saw it in this thread: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4343&page=17&pp=20

 

[James2097]

Uncivilised? Hmm...

What about high up in the mountains of Papua New Guinea? Dudes still eat each other there, its quite normal. One cannibal in a (recent) interview said "When I get hungry I just go up the mountain a bit more and get one of them other tribe's people, I spear him in the head and eat him for my dinner. Its like my 'fridge' up there..." (grins widely to the camera).

Can anyone top this?

 

[Max_DC]

Uncivilised? Hmm...

What about high up in the mountains of Papua New Guinea? Dudes still eat each other there, its quite normal. One cannibal in a (recent) interview said "When I get hungry I just go up the mountain a bit more and get one of them other tribe's people, I spear him in the head and eat him for my dinner. Its like my 'fridge' up there..." (grins widely to the camera).

Can anyone top this?

ah well that's a point... but I heard that these tribes in Papua New Guinea don't pay a lot of taxes at all and the rich tribe leaders pay as much as the poorest in the village... I mean so they have to be civilized.... you know because the government doesn't steal their money... I don't understand your argumentation... You talked about food, but food is essential ... what about the taxes....

 

[Famine]

Infringing one person's rights to protect yourself or another person is never civilised or moral.

 

[Swift]

Infringing one person's rights to protect yourself or another person is never civilised or moral.

Could you site an example please?

 

[Famine]

Cite.

Killing someone when you're hungry so you can have something to eat.

Max was being sarcastic, saying that because the people mentioned in the previous post don't pay taxes, they must be ultra-civilised. I was merely pointing out that the "taxation" argument from earlier on is just a small part of a much, much larger picture - taking someone else's rights from them to satisfy your own or someone else's needs cannot be moral or civilised. Ever.

 

[livemusic]

So the thread´s title should be "Which is the least uncivilized nation on the earth?".

 

[Swift]

Cite.

Killing someone when you're hungry so you can have something to eat.

Max was being sarcastic, saying that because the people mentioned in the previous post don't pay taxes, they must be ultra-civilised. I was merely pointing out that the "taxation" argument from earlier on is just a small part of a much, much larger picture - taking someone else's rights from them to satisfy your own or someone else's needs cannot be moral or civilised. Ever.

Can't argue with that logic....

 

[Stian]

Hehe, just have to hand it to Viper Zero for sheer stubborn "patriotism". You made my day here.

 

[Solid Fro]

And I may have to hand it to you for your complete Idiotarianism, Stian.

Look it up.

 

[Stian]

And I may have to hand it to you for your complete Idiotarianism, Stian.

Look it up.

Should I look it up the same place I should look up the long list of nukes and stuff found in Iraq then? Or is it hidden in a cunning way, such as together with the fact that handgun density is in no way higher in usa than elswhere?

So, read any good books lately? No, those comics don't count! Stooopid.

 

[Solid Fro]

Idiotarian.

Sorry, Stian. We already had this discussion multiple times almost a year ago.

The party is over.

 

[vladimir]

Idiotarian.

Sorry, Stian. We already had this discussion multiple times almost a year ago.

The party is over.

discussion? sorry, but a discussion works differently.

i asked you multiple times to come up with some facts or background information to proove your claims, but you never responded.

if that isn't stubborn, i don't know what it is.

 

[Stian]

No wonder people here can't back those claims. Bush and Blair is unable, and those guys are like presidents and PM's and stuff hehe. I must say I was worried when (basically a 3rd world country, we must remember) Iraq supposedly had their nukes at the ready and aimed at pretty much all the world. Or wadda ya say Blair? They could not even bomb their vincinity? Oh, ain't that a shame then. Well at least the world (read usa) liberated the women in Afganistan then. Apart from, naturally, they still have to wear their burka and risk rape and murder if they don't. Well, you can't have it all, eh? But wait. I heard this yank on the brain-box (or TV) saying neither Afganistan NOR Saddam was to blame for 11-9. It was in fact... (wait for it!) Iran. Huh, those blasted iranians. Well now they must be guilty of something at least. I know, they still practice the death penalty there. Let's get 'em!!! Err, hang on... But in the end it's probably Syria all along, ain't it he he. Ya cleverclogs.

 

[Danoff]

I heard this yank on the brain-box (or TV) saying neither Afganistan NOR Saddam was to blame for 11-9. It was in fact... (wait for it!) Iran.

...I suppose you believe everything you hear from the "brain-box". It was Al Qaeda that was directly responsible for 9-11, not Afganistan, not Iraq, not Iran and not Syria.

No wonder people here can't back those claims. Bush and Blair is unable, and those guys are like presidents and PM's and stuff hehe. I must say I was worried when (basically a 3rd world country, we must remember) Iraq supposedly had their nukes at the ready and aimed at pretty much all the world.

You must have been listening to the "brain-box" again. I don't remember anyone claiming that Iraq had nukes at the ready and aimed at all the world. I remember claims quit contrary to that made by the US president. Bottom line, the US was enforcing its cease-fire agreement with Iraq. The first Gulf War never officially ended. If you can't grasp that, the "brain-box" isn't going to solve your problem.

 

[Famine]

I don't remember anyone claiming that Iraq had nukes at the ready and aimed at all the world.

Actually, Blair did say that - or a close approximation of it.

The official Government line was that Iraq had "Weapons of Mass Destruction which could be used with 45 minutes notice".

That caused a bit of a stir, I can tell you.

 

[Danoff]

The official Government line was that Iraq had "Weapons of Mass Destruction which could be used with 45 minutes notice".

That's not the same thing as:

Iraq supposedly had their nukes at the ready and aimed at pretty much all the world.

The top quote could be chemical weapons ready to be used in Iraq within 45 minutes notice. The second quote assumes that they have ICBM rocketry and nuclear weapons - neither of which were true and which President Bush was clear about saying was not the case. I don't know what Blair said on the matter.

 

[Hell Raiser]

ok guys .it seems that the topic turned from "which is the most civil nation" into bashing and ragging on each others nation.Bottom line is there are no civil nations.Each nation has it's own little dirty secrets.So we all could argue and call each other names,untill the cows come home"as the Americans like to say",and you would not get anywhere soon.So all of you just give it a rest.DAMN

 

[Famine]

The top quote could be chemical weapons ready to be used in Iraq within 45 minutes notice. The second quote assumes that they have ICBM rocketry and nuclear weapons - neither of which were true and which President Bush was clear about saying was not the case. I don't know what Blair said on the matter.

Thanks to this we now have the phrase "sexed up" in common parlance.

It seems as if "Government officials" got preliminary reports from MI6 "sexed up" (thanks, tabloids. No, seriously) in order to move public opinion behind the war. The official line was originally that Saddam "probably has WMDs", which was altered to "He does have them and can use them quickly". Hell, the UK can't even use its nukes without about an hour of UN wrangling.

The impression that was meant to be conveyed was that "Saddam's pointing a nuke at London" although the real meaning could easily have been that he could have had a big VX bomb set to annihilate Baghdad and no ordnance of any variety, as you say.

 

[Stian]

...I suppose you believe everything you hear from the "brain-box". It was Al Qaeda that was directly responsible for 9-11, not Afganistan, not Iraq, not Iran and not Syria.

Well good on you for noticing. A fair share of the yanks do not remember this. But you might remember the reason given for war in Afganistan? As I recall, it was a direct result of the WTC attack. And supposedly about 30 per cent of the american population still believe Saddam Hussein was behind WTC.
And these new rumors flying around, that Iran was involved in WTC? Surely you must have heard?
My final comment on Syria is just the natural conclusion. The troops are allready there. Why fly them home, and back again. That kind of "thinking" going on in the Pentagon I assume. They are after all, pretty simple minds. But we shall have to wait and see on that one. I will bring this thread back when the us declares war on Syria.
And you need not worry. I do not believe everything on the telly. Although here in Europe we have a somewhat free press, unlike US where censorship dictates what is allowed to tell the population. The "powers that be" surely would not want more of the public opinion turning against them. Were I a dictator, I'd do the same I guess...

 

[Swift]

Well good on you for noticing. A fair share of the yanks do not remember this. But you might remember the reason given for war in Afganistan? As I recall, it was a direct result of the WTC attack. And supposedly about 30 per cent of the american population still believe Saddam Hussein was behind WTC.
And these new rumors flying around, that Iran was involved in WTC? Surely you must have heard?
My final comment on Syria is just the natural conclusion. The troops are allready there. Why fly them home, and back again. That kind of "thinking" going on in the Pentagon I assume. They are after all, pretty simple minds. But we shall have to wait and see on that one. I will bring this thread back when the us declares war on Syria.
And you need not worry. I do not believe everything on the telly. Although here in Europe we have a somewhat free press, unlike US where censorship dictates what is allowed to tell the population. The "powers that be" surely would not want more of the public opinion turning against them. Were I a dictator, I'd do the same I guess...

I believe we've found our official replacement for Jackthehat

 

[Duke]

Yeah, everybody in the world is smart, honest, and altruistic unless they're either American or politically in bed with Dubya.
👍

 

[Stian]

I believe we've found our official replacement for Jackthehat

I don't know if I'm to be outraged or flattered by that one, so I'll go ahed and feel a bit of both for now he he

 

[///M-Spec]

Although here in Europe we have a somewhat free press, unlike US where censorship dictates what is allowed to tell the population.

Interesting statement. So there is no such thing as the First Amendment in the US? Newspapers, television stations and websites must first obtain approval from the US government before they may air a story?

So how did you get past the government censors in order to post this? If there is a vast conspiracy to keep Americans in the dark, surely some random no body like yourself could not have written what you just did.


M

 

[Stian]

Interesting statement. So there is no such thing as the First Amendment in the US? Newspapers, television stations and websites must first obtain approval from the US government before they may air a story?

So how did you get past the government censors in order to post this? If there is a vast conspiracy to keep Americans in the dark, surely some random no body like yourself could not have written what you just did.


M

Gonna thread on soar ground here for sure, but still... How is it that the free press is not allowed to show the coffins of dead american soldiers? Because of the First Amendment? Don't think so myself. And the reporters "embedded" with the troops? Sending home unbiased reports I'll wager. And the reporters acctually doing critical reporting on site in Iraq? How is it that they keep getting arrested? Or shot? Accidentally, sure, but it makes me wonder...

 

[Duke]

Although here in Europe we have a somewhat free press, unlike US where censorship dictates what is allowed to tell the population. The "powers that be" surely would not want more of the public opinion turning against them. Were I a dictator, I'd do the same I guess...

This is not the way to have anyone take your opinion even remotley seriously, since it highlights the fact that you know nothing about what you're saying. Now, if you want to discuss 'censorship', let's consider this little tidbit:

The Chinese government has blocked Web loggers, or "bloggers," from using what it deems to be inappropriate language in their online entries. Among the words banned: "democracy," "freedom," and "human rights."

When Chinese users of a new Microsoft (search) "blogging" program begin to type those words in the subject line, a message pops up saying, "Prohibited language in text, please delete." The ability to do that comes courtesy of Microsoft, which admits helping censor online content in China. The Chinese government often demands such cooperation before letting Internet-related companies do business inside its borders.

Yeah, but Americans are the ones who are forced to swallow the Party Line. I think a second

is distinctly called for.

 

[Max_DC]