Oppositions to Arabs

[roalan]

reply

It is left but it is on the Ecomony not Auth. I am for the enviremenmt and the worker I think CEO's are the second most stupid and first most overpaid group in the world. #1 goes to reporters they are the largest group of morons in the world. I delt with the idiots for many years and NEVER even ONCE was something they printed 100% accurate. There was always at least one small mistake to major mistake. The old saying believe NOTHING of what you read and only half of what you see is very true. As far as the Auth/Lib I am a + strong military-Death Pen. etc. I do not see my self as a liberial except when it come to the economy.
I suppose it is foolish for poorer countries to give to richer one but what I ment is if they take our aid they should not bit the hand that feeds them.

[gsmoove23]

"Can't buy me looove, can't buy me looove, everbody tells me so" Sorry, got carried away. Don't even know if the words are right.

Left on the economy is something. Good to find some common ground I guess.

[roalan]

my problem

That has always been my biggest problem to vote Dem or Rep. The Dems are good on the Econ. and envirerment and the Reps. good on Auth.I wish there was someone that could take from both parties and combine it. If I remember correctly Everette Dirkson was close to the center?

[Chemical Ollie]

Re: The Rare Virtue Of A Wandering Thread

Originally posted by Ozymandias


To us all, and moderators perhaps especially! --

There is a genuinely unique aspect to this thread, which comprises many (granted, by no means all) of its digressions and rants.

For ALL of our lifetimes until 9/11, the clash of arms was between ideological blocks (often very artifically constructed) or between nations, often within the same "civilization" (almost all of Europe's 20th Century wars).
...
In these forums, I am ALWAYS asking, "what is a civilization", knowing full well that there is no comprehensive answer, but even our OT rants have served to ask/question --

1. Is there an "Islamic" Civ vs. a "Juedeo-Christian" civ?

2. Is either really a single Civ?

3. Do America and Europe make up one cultural Civ or not -- for that matter, does EITHER Europe or America make up a single Civ?

The thread's initial, well-posed question, about some opposition to an Arab Civ, has led to this, as we are forced to examine, up close and ugly, the first titanic rift between what have historically been different Civs, in our lifetimes -- and it has a 1300 year pedigree, to boot.

So you see it's all very, very much on-topic, for we are all questioning what a "Civilization" is, in a non-academic manner, for the very first time.

So kudos to everyone who has thoughtfully participated, no matter what his or her opinion.

Peace, Salaam, Shalom,

Ozymandias

I think the thread topic was which tribes should belong in CIV3 and not, with the cultural links between Arabs-Babylonians and Americans-English as initial examples. Now that the game is out there, the discussion is of less value for the vanilla game, but it might inspire people to some interesting mods.

I do not understand how the 9/11 or other very recent events should have any connection to which tribes should be in a computer game stretching over 6000 years of human history, neither why US foreign aid, Noam Chomsky or the political compass should belong to this discussion.

The term "civilisations" is very vaguely defined as you point out. I prefer to call them "tribes" instead, as that is a term that in my opinion better fits the actual game feature. The definition of a tribe is a group of people who share the same or at least the similar language, religion and race. Over history, there has been a great mix and regional movement of the original tribes, which in some cases have merged into completely new tribes. The English is a good example, made up of mostly Celts, Vikings, Anglons, Saxons and Normands, which over 1000 years has unified and become a quite uniform and unique tribe of its own.

The Americans are an exception to the "tribe" definition, as they have no common language, religion or race. It obviously takes longer than 200 years to unify all etnic groups, especially those who resist assimilation. I still think they belong in game though, for numerous reasons.

People following a certain religion is normally not a tribe, except in a few cases. Islam or Christianity are not tribes but Arabs and Germans are. One exception might be the Jews, who are more or less the Hebrew tribe. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[gsmoove23]

I'm not one for posting off-topic in on-topic threads but when a thread has been thoroughly derailed I enjoy the ride. On-topic this thread was limping along to begin with since nobody can come up with a non-racially non-map-starting place argument for an "OPPPOSITION to the ARABS." It did however drift into subtle reasoning for an opposition to the arabs based in the events of 9/11, the arab-israeli conflict and also touched on the rights of our current american and western civs to judge "evil" or arab civs. But thats just my feeble attempt to explain our off-topic digressions

[Traelin]

Re: Re: Bull

Originally posted by gsmoove23
I guess share the wealth would be too radical a thing to say on this thread, but I would expect it.

Sharing the wealth is up to the individual. Why should one be forced to give up money if he/she doesn't want to? It's not the govt.'s choice to take money I earned and redistribute it. Sure, selfish people will pay for their actions when they face God, but that's for God to judge. I am absolutely, 100% opposed to socialism. Robin Hood tactics only work in the movies.

Perhaps the govt. should borrow a page from Powell and start implementing mandatory volunteerism programs. Maybe then people would choose to be more giving.

Now the one caveat I have is when people lie, cheat, and steal money to become wealthy, like many CEOs. That's a whole different ballgame.

Originally posted by gsmoove23
if Roalan is left-wing and Traelin is centre what does that mean for the US.

Hehe I know we don't see eye to eye on many things gs, but I find that just about every position of mine on political issues is the same position that McCain has. And I think he would have been great for this country as Pres. I think I can best be summed up as one who believes in personal responsibility. I'm very individualist and think that people should stop looking for handouts and placing blame on anyone but themselves.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
You skipped my most important point. I asked why are we suprised that France doesn't give money to the richest country in the world? or that we give more money in international support then any other country(I'm not sure you could say per capita, can anyone find figures for this?)? We ARE the RICHEST country in the world. I simply don't see the significance of saying we give the most money so we deserve to be tre... I should HOPE we give the most money since we HAVE the most.

Again, I don't believe in redistributing the wealth. People need to CHOOSE to do so. I they want to be selfish and greedy, that's fine by me. God will take care of it later, but I'll be darned if I will support any laws that require people to give to the needy. If nothing else, it'll create resentment among the wealthy and defeat the whole purpose of trying to "show them the light". And they'll end up being even more selfish.

[Traelin]

Re: reply

Originally posted by roalan
It is left but it is on the Ecomony not Auth. I am for the enviremenmt and the worker I think CEO's are the second most stupid and first most overpaid group in the world. #1 goes to reporters they are the largest group of morons in the world. I delt with the idiots for many years and NEVER even ONCE was something they printed 100% accurate. There was always at least one small mistake to major mistake. The old saying believe NOTHING of what you read and only half of what you see is very true. As far as the Auth/Lib I am a + strong military-Death Pen. etc. I do not see my self as a liberial except when it come to the economy.
I suppose it is foolish for poorer countries to give to richer one but what I ment is if they take our aid they should not bit the hand that feeds them.

I think roalan and I agree on most issues, but the reason people see us as extremist (for lack of a better word) is because we're more vocal. Perhaps more blunt? I can only speak for myself though. I just like to call it like I see it, and not paint pretty pictures to be politically correct. I'm actually a nice guy, but I'm not a good politician.

[Traelin]

Re: my problem

Originally posted by roalan
That has always been my biggest problem to vote Dem or Rep. The Dems are good on the Econ. and envirerment and the Reps. good on Auth.I wish there was someone that could take from both parties and combine it. If I remember correctly Everette Dirkson was close to the center?

McCain was awesome. He is so like Teddy Roosevelt it's amazing. Very good with the environment, with the military, with abortion. He's just very common-sensical. People saw him as very blunt though, which is what I found even more appealing.

I agree with you on the Dem./Rep. issue roalan. I think the Repubs are disgustingly greedy and don't give a crap about the common man. But the Dems want to force us to redistribute everything. I feel like I can't win for losing? Heck my vote was even split recently. I voted for Bush, but I voted for a Dem for governor (Mark Warner). I felt we needed a business-savvy environmentalist in VA to protect the Bay and save our disgusting deficit.

[gsmoove23]

Traelin, I didn't know you were a libertarian you should check out this thread.

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1433287#post1433287

We profit a lot from US funded international stability. Markets for our product, stable countries our multinationals can locate factories in, stable stock market... Your lifestyle is improved dramatically by US international aid, in ways neither you or I could fathom and this works for domestic welfare as well, but thats the pragmatic approach that I disagree with. I just believe we live in a society and it doesn't end at our borders. We owe everything we have and are to that society, that society in turn has certain responsibilities towards us.

[Traelin]

Re: Re: The Rare Virtue Of A Wandering Thread

Originally posted by Olaf HÃ¥rfagre


I think the thread topic was which tribes should belong in CIV3 and not, with the cultural links between Arabs-Babylonians and Americans-English as initial examples. Now that the game is out there, the discussion is of less value for the vanilla game, but it might inspire people to some interesting mods.

I do not understand how the 9/11 or other very recent events should have any connection to which tribes should be in a computer game stretching over 6000 years of human history, neither why US foreign aid, Noam Chomsky or the political compass should belong to this discussion.

The term "civilisations" is very vaguely defined as you point out. I prefer to call them "tribes" instead, as that is a term that in my opinion better fits the actual game feature. The definition of a tribe is a group of people who share the same or at least the similar language, religion and race. Over history, there has been a great mix and regional movement of the original tribes, which in some cases have merged into completely new tribes. The English is a good example, made up of mostly Celts, Vikings, Anglons, Saxons and Normands, which over 1000 years has unified and become a quite uniform and unique tribe of its own.

The Americans are an exception to the "tribe" definition, as they have no common language, religion or race. It obviously takes longer than 200 years to unify all etnic groups, especially those who resist assimilation. I still think they belong in game though, for numerous reasons.

People following a certain religion is normally not a tribe, except in a few cases. Islam or Christianity are not tribes but Arabs and Germans are. One exception might be the Jews, who are more or less the Hebrew tribe. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Granted, we have all digressed at certain points in this thread. But somehow we have always found a way to get back on-topic. Sometimes it just takes longer to do it. Plus when you think about it, how many on-topic comments can you really have on any thread? It's bound to go slightly OT, and there's really nothing wrong with that if people show interest.

[sabrewolf]

traelin, you're no extremist. maybe on a few topic, but in general you seem to me like a normal right wing person...

[roalan]

Traelin

Yes McCain is the other I was thinking about. And TR absolutely.. I agree with you I call it the way I see it. I used to be a union steward for the DOE and you bet they hated to see me comming.

[gsmoove23]

Unfortunately Traelin, i don't think you're extremist either, relative to US politics at least. Forgive me I'm very sad regarding the last couple of days. Wouldn't be that much happier if the Dems won out big either though. Ralph Nader anyone?

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
I'm not one for posting off-topic in on-topic threads but when a thread has been thoroughly derailed I enjoy the ride. On-topic this thread was limping along to begin with since nobody can come up with a non-racially non-map-starting place argument for an "OPPPOSITION to the ARABS." It did however drift into subtle reasoning for an opposition to the arabs based in the events of 9/11, the arab-israeli conflict and also touched on the rights of our current american and western civs to judge "evil" or arab civs. But thats just my feeble attempt to explain our off-topic digressions

If anyone hates Arabs after 9/11, that's a strong reason to include them in the game. One of the joys of computer gaming is the possibility to play the bad guy you can never be in real life. That's why I would prefer Hitler as the German leaderhead rather than Bismarck.

If you should have a unique unit for the Arabs reflecting 9/11, it should be the suicide bomber. That's a cheap one-shot stealth foot soldier unit with the attack range of one. Similar to the cruise missile but with shorter range and only targeting city population. This might upset some people, but after all, most RTS games I have played contained some kind of suicide bomber. Age of Empires had the petard, Warcraft II had the goblin zapper and Starcraft had the infested terran.

But to have a historically correct Arab golden age, some kind of camel rider would be better.