Off Topic [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Off Topic



MasterCylinder
06-17-2009, 06:47 AM
MOSCOW Russia and China expressed serious concern Wednesday about tension on the Korean peninsula and, in the face of increasingly belligerent rhetoric, joined international pressure for North Korea to return to nuclear talks.

The U.S. vowed it would never accept North Korea as an atomic weapons state and, at a board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, urged the country to negotiate with the world's great powers instead of making threats.

Only hours earlier, North Korea warned the United States and its allies of a "thousand-fold" military retaliation if provoked.

Japanese and South Korean news reports said North Korea is preparing an additional site for test-firing a long-range missile that experts say could be capable of striking the United States. A Russian deputy defense minister said earlier that Russia would shoot down any North Korean missile headed its way but might not be able to detect missiles aimed in other directions.

Pyongyang, which is believed to have enough weaponized plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs, claims they are a deterrence against the United States and accuses Washington of plotting with South Korea to topple its secretive regime.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kim Jong Il is a freaking nut.............everytime I see him he looks drunk.
I think the guy has a serious alcohol problem that feeds his insecurities.
The rest of his regime works to keep it quiet.............they constantly try to beat their chests and hold the other nations hostage for whatever.
Obama & Putin should use satellites to melt the next North Korean test-missle just before it is fired...............just to show NK some bit of reality.

Hyfi
06-17-2009, 12:02 PM
MOSCOW Russia and China expressed serious concern Wednesday about tension on the Korean peninsula and, in the face of increasingly belligerent rhetoric, joined international pressure for North Korea to return to nuclear talks.

The U.S. vowed it would never accept North Korea as an atomic weapons state and, at a board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, urged the country to negotiate with the world's great powers instead of making threats.

Only hours earlier, North Korea warned the United States and its allies of a "thousand-fold" military retaliation if provoked.

Japanese and South Korean news reports said North Korea is preparing an additional site for test-firing a long-range missile that experts say could be capable of striking the United States. A Russian deputy defense minister said earlier that Russia would shoot down any North Korean missile headed its way but might not be able to detect missiles aimed in other directions.

Pyongyang, which is believed to have enough weaponized plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs, claims they are a deterrence against the United States and accuses Washington of plotting with South Korea to topple its secretive regime.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kim Jong Il is a freaking nut.............everytime I see him he looks drunk.
I think the guy has a serious alcohol problem that feeds his insecurities.
The rest of his regime works to keep it quiet.............they constantly try to beat their chests and hold the other nations hostage for whatever.
Obama & Putin should use satellites to melt the next North Korean test-missle just before it is fired...............just to show NK some bit of reality.

To keep this thread on topic.....it sounds like NK is due for some Sweet Chin Music!

But, why is it OK for the US to have any weapons it wants and at the same time we dictate to all other countries what they can and cannot do? No wonder the majority of the world hates the US!

kexodusc
06-18-2009, 03:59 AM
This guy is a freaking nut. How does he think all this is going to end?

MasterCylinder
06-18-2009, 04:18 AM
But, why is it OK for the US to have any weapons it wants and at the same time we dictate to all other countries what they can and cannot do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Because we were the first to steal all the Nazi intelligence, put them in Los Alamos, and was the first to build it............the World at that time was a different place........America lived in a different context and a different role...............now, 60 years later, we all discover it is more than we bargained for............and if placed in the wrong hands...........well........you know.

Auricauricle
06-18-2009, 06:53 AM
Thanks fer clearing that up, MC!

The NK's have long used the strategy of creating a crisis to get everybody on the baragaining table. The diversions save face for the NK's who don't want to be seen as hungry paupers begging for scraps and the Americans can puff themselves up for averting a distaster.

Now the rules are changing. America's economic disaster has undermined our formidiability. With the attention of its military focused principally in Iraq etc., the NK's can flex their pecs with little fear of retaliation. According the NYT, the Americans have flinched, stating that they will approach the ships of NK's navy but not board them. Showing our hand this way was not smart, and we are the paper tiger now.

I don't underestimate the NK's capacity to pick a fight or step up and destabilize the region. I am confident that the Japanese and Chinese are equally concerned and may use force if necessary to keep things in check. The problem is the NK premeire is a nut and seems to have little qualms about using his people as cannon fodder.

God help us all!

Finch Platte
06-18-2009, 07:03 AM
This guy is a freaking nut. How does he think all this is going to end?

They'll launch a weapon, do 'minor' damage to someone, we'll bomb the sh!t outta them & send in troops, then we'll shovel $$ their way towards rebuilding the country (if someone hasn't taken advantage of our weakened state in the interim).

I dunno. Just a guess.

Hyfi
06-18-2009, 08:15 AM
They'll launch a weapon, do 'minor' damage to someone, we'll bomb the sh!t outta them & send in troops, then we'll shovel $$ their way towards rebuilding the country (if someone hasn't taken advantage of our weakened state in the interim).

I dunno. Just a guess.

Oh how history just keeps repeating itself. If we use our Nukes, there won't be a need to rebuild.

Auricauricle
06-18-2009, 08:45 AM
Rebuild? Not a chance. We're already soaked to the bone rebuilding Iraq etc. Not to mention here! Rebuild? Ach, you make me laugh! Bwahahahahaha....

GMichael
06-18-2009, 09:02 AM
But, why is it OK for the US to have any weapons it wants and at the same time we dictate to all other countries what they can and cannot do? No wonder the majority of the world hates the US!


Because we were the first to steal all the Nazi intelligence, put them in Los Alamos, and was the first to build it............the World at that time was a different place........America lived in a different context and a different role...............now, 60 years later, we all discover it is more than we bargained for............and if placed in the wrong hands...........well........you know.

Both good points.
The more we try to stop them, the more they will want to use them on us when they are ready. And they will eventually be ready, no matter how much we puff out our chests and bark orders like we run the globe. Wouldn't it be better to teach them how to be responsible with this great big stick they are building? Maybe trade them tips for the promise of them learning how NOT to use them?
It sounds normal to me that any country that does not have nukes would want to join the party. But they need to be taught that having them and using them are two different things. The last thing we need to do it to piss them off so much that we become their testing grounds. Granted, they would end up worse than us, but we still wouldn't enjoy it.
These people are going to end up with nukes in their hands no matter what we say. Will we makes those hands the right ones, or the hateful wrong ones?

ForeverAutumn
06-18-2009, 09:09 AM
Wouldn't it be better to teach them how to be responsible with this great big stick they are building?

If they wanted to be responsible, they wouldn't be playing with plutonium in the first place.

GMichael
06-18-2009, 09:11 AM
If they wanted to be responsible, they wouldn't be building weapons like this in the first place.

I just don't see a way of stopping them. It's going to happen. Either behind closed doors or above board. I'd rather see the latter.

Hyfi
06-18-2009, 09:14 AM
Both good points.
The more we try to stop them, the more they will want to use them on us when they are ready. And they will eventually be ready, no matter how much we puff out our chests and bark orders like we run the globe. Wouldn't it be better to teach them how to be responsible with this great big stick they are building? Maybe trade them tips for the promise of them learning how NOT to use them?
It sounds normal to me that any country that does not have nukes would want to join the party. But they need to be taught that having them and using them are two different things. The last thing we need to do it to piss them off so much that we become their testing grounds. Granted, they would end up worse than us, but we still wouldn't enjoy it.
These people are going to end up with nukes in their hands no matter what we say. Will we makes those hands the right ones, or the hateful wrong ones?

The only reason to have them, is to use them.

MasterCylinder
06-18-2009, 09:20 AM
The only reason to have them, is to use them.

Sincerely,
Harry Truman

GMichael
06-18-2009, 09:23 AM
The only reason to have them, is to use them.

I'm sure they feel the same about us having them.

Don't get me wrong. I'd rather not see anyone with nukes. (us included) I just don't see a way that will stop it from happening. The information is already out there for them to use. Supplies will always be available to anyone willing to pay enough. All we are doing is making enemies.
If we have a way of stopping them without starting WWIII then I'm all for it.

kexodusc
06-18-2009, 10:06 AM
I care less about nations owning nukes than I do about rogue elements coming into possession of nuclear weapons. That's why I don't think other nations should have them.

The US, Russia, etc all have a pretty good track record of not letting nukes get into the wrong hands leading to detonation...maybe there's been some close calls, I dunno. Not many attacks though. I'm not sure I would feel as secure about some other countries having them.

GMichael
06-18-2009, 10:12 AM
I care less about nations owning nukes than I do about rogue elements coming into possession of nuclear weapons. That's why I don't think other nations should have them.

The US, Russia, etc all have a pretty good track record of not letting nukes get into the wrong hands leading to detonation...maybe there's been some close calls, I dunno. Not many attacks though. I'm not sure I would feel as secure about some other countries having them.

I do agree with this. I just don't see safe way to stop them.

ForeverAutumn
06-18-2009, 10:48 AM
The only way to get rid of these weapons is to have a worldwide truce that all leaders can and will agree to.

As long as one country has nuclear weapons, other countries are going to feel the need to protect themselves. Russia needed nukes because the US had them. The US needed nukes because Russia had them. NK needs them because the US and Russia have them. And on and on and on.

Why should NK stop developing weapons? Has the US stopped? Has China stopped? We can only hope that the leaders of these countries are responsible enough not to use them. After all, nuclear war is a no-win situation. I don't think that anyone wants to see it happen. But as long as you have a gun and I feel threatened by it, I'm going to need a gun too.

Auricauricle
06-18-2009, 11:07 AM
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

Thank you, Mr. Gandhi.

Mr MidFi
06-18-2009, 11:36 AM
There are no good answers when it comes to the North Korean dilemma.

Kim is a nut. There is no disputing this fact. But unfortunately, we've established a track record of calling every national leader that we don't like a nut-job, so now it doesn't mean much (despite the fact that it's true this time).

More to the point, we have established a record of rewarding the NK regime with a treasure trove of incentives every time he starts making the region nervous. Like we're appeasing a spoiled 3-year-old with candy treats just to forestall the next tantrum. And of course, behavior rewarded is behavior repeated.

But well beyond our policies toward NK, there is the long-term question of nuclear arms development. It's a 64-year-old technology, approximately the same as the jet engine. Can you imagine that as a bedrock foundation of our foreign policy... keeping jet engines out of the hands of every other nation on earth?

Playing perpetual whack-a-mole with nuclear wannabes, now and forever, until the end of time is not a long-term strategy. Not a good one anyway.

Hyfi
06-18-2009, 11:58 AM
The only way to get rid of these weapons is to have a worldwide truce that all leaders can and will agree to.




Great idea but........

How do you know when a Politician is lying?


Their lips are moving.

I don't trust the US any more than I trust the rest of the world. I'm sure the warmongering Bush-Whacker would have loved to drop the big one after saying "Bring 'em on!"

Luckily somebody held his hand back.

bobsticks
06-18-2009, 02:17 PM
But, why is it OK for the US to have any weapons it wants and at the same time we dictate to all other countries what they can and cannot do? No wonder the majority of the world hates the US!

...because our leaders, no matter how petulant and horrific, are never reminscent of a demented sock puppet...

Auricauricle
06-18-2009, 02:47 PM
Take a child that has gotten everything he has asked for. He kicks and screams until his desires are met. It goes on....

Take a dog that has gotten everything it has asked for. He snarls and snaps until its desires are satisfied. It goes on....

Take a dictator.....

Who will tell him enough is enough?

This will probably need to be handled internally, yet the paranoia and fear are so entrenched, no one will dare.

Only time must take its course. Even tidal waves recede into the blue.

Until then, we play the cards as they are dealt...

ForeverAutumn
06-18-2009, 03:37 PM
Take a dictator.....

Who will tell him enough is enough?

This will probably need to be handled internally, yet the paranoia and fear are so entrenched, no one will dare.


Internally? Not likely. Someone will have to deal with Kim the same way Hussien was dealt with.

bobsticks
06-18-2009, 04:05 PM
I do believe Autumn's countryman, Rob Furlong, would be perfect for the job. Yup yup....

nightflier
06-18-2009, 04:06 PM
Doesn't it seem like NK is playing the please-pay-attention-to-me-too game as the rest of the world was focusing on the economic downturn? Childish, perhaps, but as we now know from past experience, quite effective too.

Didn't NK threaten to nuke Hawaii or some such nonsense? I for one think the Chinese will whack that mole before we or our European friends will have to. After all, we're their #1 customer and a Nuke from over yonder hitting our shores is just going to look like a general "Asian" attack, which certainly doesn't help the Chinese.

Hmmmm... is California within NK's ICBM range?

-Jar-
06-19-2009, 05:28 AM
The bigger concern is that Russia, China and Brazil (and Iran) were meeting without inviting the United States or our allies. They'd love to see the dollar go down in flames. Think things are bad now?

Mr MidFi
06-19-2009, 05:47 AM
I for one think the Chinese will whack that mole before we or our European friends will have to. After all, we're their #1 customer and a Nuke from over yonder hitting our shores is just going to look like a general "Asian" attack, which certainly doesn't help the Chinese.

See, this is kind of where I was going with my previous post. A policy that assumes we (that is, the U.S.) will be able to project our considerable power into every corner of the globe and thwart the evil nuclear threat wherever and whenever it rears its head... forever and ever, amen... is doomed to fail eventually.

The only sensible solution is, as you suggest, an interconnected global alliance of interests among the leading powers. True, the U.S. and China make strange bedfellows, at least for now. But no one wants to see a mushroom cloud. It would be very bad for business.

FA: Someone will have to deal with Kim the same way Hussien was dealt with.

No. This is a very different situation, for several key reasons.

1. Kim has actual nuclear weapons and actual missiles, not vague rumors of 'nuclear development program activity' or some such.

2. With or without nukes, the NKs are poised to obliterate Seoul, a city of 10 million, within the first minutes of a shooting war. Or, ahem, 'regime change'. Or whatever we're calling it.

3. The entire nation of NK has been brainwashed to revere Kim as a living god, moreso than any other nation in modern history. Moreso than Stalin or Hitler in their respective countries. And certainly more than Saddam. The people live in abject poverty and under unprecedented mind control. All they have is their love of the Dear Leader. The level of trauma to their collective national psyche would be inconceivable to most western minds.

And...just who is this "someone" you had in mind, anyway? The Canadian Air Force?

MasterCylinder
06-19-2009, 06:49 AM
1. Kim has actual nuclear weapons and actual missiles, not vague rumors of 'nuclear development program activity' or some such.

2. With or without nukes, the NKs are poised to obliterate Seoul, a city of 10 million, within the first minutes of a shooting war. Or, ahem, 'regime change'. Or whatever we're calling it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Regarding the two points above.............we have some degree of certainty about the intelligence associated with NK nuclear capabilities...........unfortunately, the West does not have as much knowledge about NK's capabilities with chemical and biological weapons...............I have seen quotes from the CIA that suggest these threats are actually greater.
=======================

3. The entire nation of NK has been brainwashed to revere Kim as a living god, moreso than any other nation in modern history. Moreso than Stalin or Hitler in their respective countries. And certainly more than Saddam. The people live in abject poverty and under unprecedented mind control. All they have is their love of the Dear Leader. The level of trauma to their collective national psyche would be inconceivable to most western minds.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Very dangerous............and I'm tellin' ya'................the dude is a drunk !

Luvin Da Blues
06-19-2009, 06:59 AM
And...just who is this "someone" you had in mind, anyway? The Canadian Air Force?

Sorry, can't help out this week. Our Cessna is in for servicing. Maybe next week, I'll keep you informed.

Troy
06-19-2009, 11:29 AM
I think he's just a little bit ronery.

thekid
06-19-2009, 12:56 PM
You have to be worried about a country that regularly starves/abuses its people to keep its military dictatorship in luxury and arms. Kim and the Generals could see this an "End of Days" scenerio and decide to go out in a nuclear blaze of glory. I am not sure the Chinese even has much of voice in NK anymore. With the current economic downturn it seems the world is tired of being held up for food everytime Kim's belly needs filling. This may be a game of chicken that ends badly for anyone within range of NK's missle's. I hope that someone in power over in NK sees this situation for what it is and stages a coup (maybe with a little cash and encouragement by the Chinese....) gets this headed down a different path.

nightflier
06-19-2009, 02:50 PM
Everyone's talking about North Korea, but I think the more pressing issue is in Iran right now. And it's funny how little news coverage that's getting - I've read that it's another Tiananmen in the making, except there's religious extremists on one side. Even Americans have been arrested and beaten. Then again, there's no nukes in Iran so I guess it's not that important....

ForeverAutumn
06-19-2009, 06:21 PM
And...just who is this "someone" you had in mind, anyway? The Canadian Air Force?

No way man. We're not going in there. Have you seen that guy? He's crazy! :shocked:

bobsticks
06-19-2009, 09:54 PM
I think he's just a little bit ronery.

Thus far, POY baybay...Post of the Year...

<div><object width="480" height="341"><param name="movie" value="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/xhve8_team-america-im-so-ronery_fun&related=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/xhve8_team-america-im-so-ronery_fun&related=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="341" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br /><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xhve8_team-america-im-so-ronery_fun">Team America - I'm So Ronery</a></b><br /><i>Uploaded by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/Videogeezer">Videogeezer</a> - <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/us/channel/fun">Watch more comedy videos and sitcoms. </a></i></div>

MasterCylinder
06-20-2009, 05:20 AM
That video is priceless...............the only thing missing was the half-gal of STOLI.

Auricauricle
06-20-2009, 09:10 AM
Sniff! Poor, little disturbed cretin! Sniff! He's just...misunderstood! :(

Mr MidFi
06-22-2009, 05:41 AM
Everyone's talking about North Korea, but I think the more pressing issue is in Iran right now. And it's funny how little news coverage that's getting - I've read that it's another Tiananmen in the making, except there's religious extremists on one side. Even Americans have been arrested and beaten. Then again, there's no nukes in Iran so I guess it's not that important....

I agree 100%...the story is only now starting to get traction in a lot of the major daily papers. But those of us following the story on news-oriented online communities have been on top of this thing since the elections. No one knows how that thing is going to play out, at this point.

bobsticks
06-24-2009, 07:16 AM
And...just who is this "someone" you had in mind, anyway? The Canadian Air Force?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Furlong

kexodusc
06-24-2009, 09:13 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Furlong
Damn....I can't hit a moose at 50 yards!!! :eek6:

bobsticks
06-24-2009, 09:31 AM
Damn....I can't hit a moose at 50 yards!!! :eek6:

That's what I'm sayin'!

Chute ol' boy in on top of some bleak factory about a mile outta wherever that lil' Elvis-coiffed muppet is doing his next wooden soldier, goose-step coronation and deep-six the SOB. We need to back in the game.

Hey, here's a completely unrelated bit of propaganda. Flame as you will...

<object width="340" height="285"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-3X5hIFXYU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-3X5hIFXYU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="340" height="285"></embed></object>

GMichael
06-24-2009, 09:57 AM
Damn....I can't hit a moose at 50 yards!!! :eek6:

You can throw a snow ball 50 yards?

nightflier
06-24-2009, 12:11 PM
OK, I'll light the flame-thrower - everybody duck!

Sticks, where did you find that nonsense? Gilchrist's website? Pat Buchanan's? Coulter's? Not only are the numbers way off, but it over-simplifies so many key issues to make the whole message completely flawed. There was also some evangelical dialog that was trimmed from the end of the clip - 'wonder what that was about... Even if the US muslim population does grow to 9M (a number that's pretty far off, IMO), that's still what? 3%? I'm pretty sure we'll have more Mormons than that and probably sooner, too. Perhaps we should be more scared of them, LOL.

Long-story-short, this is alarmist fear-mongering.

3LB
06-24-2009, 01:03 PM
A muslim world...in 30-40 years?

they'll like the warmer temperatures then

Auricauricle
06-24-2009, 06:04 PM
Come on guys, get some perspective! Our faithful and honorable governor has returned!

Iran? Korea? Iraq?

Right....

bobsticks
06-24-2009, 07:06 PM
...and so it escalates: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_koreas_nuclear

bobsticks
06-24-2009, 07:18 PM
OK, I'll light the flame-thrower - everybody duck!

Sticks, where did you find that nonsense? Gilchrist's website? Pat Buchanan's? Coulter's? Not only are the numbers way off, but it over-simplifies so many key issues to make the whole message completely flawed. There was also some evangelical dialog that was trimmed from the end of the clip - 'wonder what that was about... Even if the US muslim population does grow to 9M (a number that's pretty far off, IMO), that's still what? 3%? I'm pretty sure we'll have more Mormons than that and probably sooner, too. Perhaps we should be more scared of them, LOL.

Long-story-short, this is alarmist fear-mongering.

I'd be interested to see your sources. That said, I'm ready to recognise the disparities in figures regarding the United States though one must take into account the mean age during the number breakdown.
There is, however, quite a bit of compelling evidence that Europe has a significant problem, similar to the one that we have with illegals from south of the border and the rampant usage of public funds.

nightflier
06-25-2009, 01:23 PM
similar to the one that we have with illegals from south of the border and the rampant usage of public funds.

Isn't that a loaded statement, too? Kind of like Reagan's non-existent "Welfare Queen" and the "fits the description" black male?

Ask yourself this: do these "illegals" represent more of a problem than a solution to our vaulted way of life? And isn't their legal status questionable considering what we've done to their countries in the past 100 or so years? Actually, didn't we steal California from their forefathers? That's prime real estate, my friend. But to bring it back to today, I seriously doubt that their "rampant use of public funds" even comes close to what they contribute to our economy by doing jobs that neither your nor I would want to do, and living a lifestyle below the poverty line that few other native-born Americans would choose? Heck, even using the word "American" is filled with historical controversy.

That's something our pale-faced brothers across the pond can't seem to come to terms with (despite their supposed higher level of education): that Muslims culture in Europe is a direct consequence of pillage and plunder for some 1000+ years. Muslim immigrants will be the first to list the long history of injustices they have endured at the hands of Europeans from the Crusades to mercantilism to Suez to Mosadeq and to the plunder of Iraq today.

Think of our way of life as the way whites in South Africa carried on until the ANC took power. Everyone knew that the masses of the black oppressed would eventually overwhelm the white settlements. No matter how cruel the repression, history has shown time and again that no amount of violence can indefinitely contain a growing population arrayed against it. Perhaps Botha and co., saw the writing on the wall and decided to make nice or loose everything before that would come to pass, and Mandela & co. agreed not to slaughter every last one of them in exchange. What troubles me is the continued unrest and lawlessness that is now the norm in the country.

That video clip is of the type used to maintain an apartheid type system, with the requisite fear-mongering and exaggerated numbers to galvanize the most hateful groups among us. But it does nothing to bring us to a peaceful transition of power, one that must inevitably occur. The alternative is mutually assured destruction, and that's the kind of brinksmanship we really don't want to revisit.... Well unless you're the nut-job who's bound and determined to run North Korea back into the stone-age. We can only hope that the rest of the world leaders have more wisdom than that.

3LB
06-25-2009, 02:07 PM
I could care less what anyone's religion, sexual orientation, or favorite cereal is...as long as they don't make it my business. I don't care if I'm surrounded by Muslims, as long as it doesn't bother them that I'm not...and there's the rub...with anything.

Its extremism in any form that ruins things. Freedom of religion isn't my right to tell you what to think and feel but the zealots think its their sworn duty to do just that...and that includes all religions and extremist groups. Try the live and let live approach with a Skinhead.

But sooner or later you got no choice and are forced to pick a side. I'd look stupid in a turban.

nightflier
07-10-2009, 02:17 PM
Try the live and let live approach with a Skinhead.

When I read that, it reminded me immediately of American History X, where Ed Norton's character was forced to confront the hypocrisy of his own racist identity when he was in prison. I've actually read that in Northern European countries they force convicted gang members from different sides to live together and work out a living arrangement without the influence of the larger racist group.

I don't know how successful these programs are, but it's obvious that separatism, whatever the basis, is really the antithesis of society. Even the all-one ethnic/cultural/religious utopias that some of these groups fantasize about, will eventually identify a new scapegoat from their own numbers and fragment further. Eventually they will fragment to the point of not even being able to survive as an isolated group.

Ironically, nature has it's own remedy for this aberrant system in that a genetically concentrated population ultimately develops deformities, still births, and over time, kills itself off. As much as some people will hate to realize it, we all will need to live in a diverse society, yes even those Branch Davidians reading this post holed up in a compound bunker somewhere in the Midwest, lol.

OK, I have to go check the motion alarms around my compound now...