Oppositions to Arabs

[sabrewolf]

olaf: yep, the tribes have been chosen: arabs, ottomans, carthagians, viking (yay... something for you sweds ), celts, spanish, mongols and the koreans...

so no point discussion, who should be in ptw... it's out (at least in the US - in europe as of 22nd novembre) and the choice has been done.

let's discuss, who should be in Civ3XP2 or in the civ3-community-extrapack...

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Mellian
simply saw this coming when i first saw this thread few days ago this should be moved to Off-TOpic.

in my opinion, i thik the people who complains about the Arab is being racist deep down, how sad .... as well as lazy for not taking out the civ themselves


-Mellian

I think the word "racist" is used WAAY too liberally. Racism has a connotation that implies dislike or contempt for an ENTIRE ethnic group. That is definitely different than prejudice. Everyone is prejudiced in one way, shape, or form. And just because someone isn't politically correct doesn't make them racist.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Druuge
US govt exaggerates wrong things too much - they should sign the Kyoto protocol instead...

Granted, no government is perfect. Not one. But one thing that everyone must admit is that we have strived and struggled to reach a point in our history where we could handle our own problems, and with vigor. We prefer peace, but aren't usually fooled into that false sense of peace like many other countries in the world.

Terrorism is wrong, and we are handling it effectively. Too bad we don't handle it with 100% of our capability, which we certainly aren't (and no, I'm certainly not hinting toward nukes for goodness sake).

The main problem I have when people say "Well terrorism has always existed, but now America is awakened to it" is the following:

This couldn't be further from the truth. Anyone that believes this is in utter denial with how much money we have shoved at other countries to fight atrocities. We do this to help others fight evil. But why do people have discontent toward us because we can handle our own problems? Sometimes I just get frustrated with all the U.S. bashing. I mean it's not my fault we have the clout. Nor is it my fault that other countries gut their militaries to the point that they are impotent against evil.

Common sense dictates many things, and one of them is to deliver a knockout blow in a war when you can, and to do so as much as you can on your own IMHO. I think other countries mistake an American individualist mentality for American arrogance. Quite frankly, if a country asked for our help to fight terrorism or a dictator or whatever, I'd say heck yeah, let's help. But don't bite the hand that feeds. That's just IMHO.

And I am not going into the even more OT discussion of Kyoto, no matter how much I want to.

[sabrewolf]

traelin,

i think the vast majority of the people around here agrees, that terrorism is bad and must be fought against.

the problem i have is when it comes to decide what's terrorism and what not. and to say who's bad and who's not. that is exactly what bush is doing by himself (well... with his administration of course).

we (most europeans) don't mind him fighting evil, but we criticise his methods and motives.
- if you want to get rid of evil dictators, get rid of all of them (equal stakes for all).
- if you want to reduce WoMD, start by giving a good example (e.g. getting rid of your own)
- don't mix up fight for independence with terrorism
- don't go by yourselves. if the majority of the world nations is against something, most probably YOU are wrong and not all others. that's the reason for your so called "U.S. bashing".
you (yourself, but also bush&co.) as a catholic (or generally christian) believe in "under god everyone is the same"... and you consider democracy the best governement. so that means, that everyone has the same rights. so why are you so sure, you're right and all others are wrong?
please answer me honestly: do you think the opinion of an american is more worth than the opinion of 10 foreigners?
- state terrorism is also terrorism - even if performed by an ally and friend

the rest of the world also want's to get rid of terrorism, but we prefer to use sustainable methods. we want to eliminate the root of evil (poverty, big influence of radicals, no-future-mentality, etc.).
terrorism is like an illness. if you only kill the terrorists, it's like taking drugs against the pain. but the infection is still there and the pain will return sooner or later.... again and again and again... sometimes you just have to consider a "real" treatment, like antibiotics or an operation.

[vmxa1]

Well actually the way it works is the biggest and the strongest determine what is and they will listen (maybe) to others, but in the end it does not matter. They will do what they percieve as in their best interest.
In this time and place that means Bush decides.

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Well actually the way it works is the biggest and the strongest determine what is and they will listen (maybe) to others, but in the end it does not matter. They will do what they percieve as in their best interest.
In this time and place that means Bush decides.

Lovely, so the entirety of international law (treaties; conventions; UN declarations -- hey! how about democratic elections in countries like Venezuela that don't elect El Presidente Bush's favorite candidate? -- kinda like the good ol' 1970s when ITT didn't like the government in Chile and so had the CIA "do something" about it) goes out the bloody window. You know, in the end, we will suffer for his pig-ignorant cowboy arrogance by seeing U.S. soldiers held in indefinite detention until hauled before secret war crimes court -- for that IS the precedent WE have set -- WE are threatenening to abrogate the very fabric of what has defined decent treatment of civilian and warrior alike, across international borders - diplomacy, treaty, law.

Heil Bush!

[Cyclotron]

This is the most OT thread I have ever seen in an on topic forum.

Way to go, guys!

[vmxa1]

Ozymandias, nice anti american sentiments, but it only proves the point I made. It in fact does not matter who the power is at the time in history, in the past it was other countries and in the future it will be who knows who, but the law of the universe is might makes right. Like it or not.

[sabrewolf]

no! don't move this thread to off topic!
we've got a quite high standard of discussion here... in OT you'll get the fascist comments from fez and the communistic PoVs of others.

and every 10th post here is on-topic

[Ozymandias]

Tying It All Together

Originally posted by vmxa1
Ozymandias, nice anti american sentiments, ... but the law of the universe is might makes right. Like it or not.

So, we have a thread on Arabs in Civ, often enjoyable and informative, often veering all over the place, too often veering towards a cliff of intolerance- we've had rants of every stripe and color, pro- and anti- oh, just about every nation and religion at hand.

I certainly will not argue that "might" is unimportant -- and I think this is the 3rd or 4th time in these forums that I'll quote Grace Slick's brilliant observation about, oh, say, 99% of human history: "In loyalty to their kind, they cannot tolerate our rise \ In loyalty to our kind we cannot tolerate their obstruction."

However, I AM very curious as to what you define "might" and "right" as -- if you are merely observing that the strongest usually wins -- then perhaps you are too young to recall Buddhist monks burning themselves to death. Or never read how the Russian winter is notorious for overcoming military power -- or, out of curiosity, are you including weather patterns in your assessment of "might"?

On 9/11, hijacked airliners were mighty -- You getting my drift here?

Now, let's walk through this slowly, just so I'm certain precisely where my "anti-Americanism" comes in.

1. My point vis-a-vis Europe was that, after a century or so of hot and cold war in which millions perished, there has been even more effort made to agree upon basic human freedoms, no matter how weak the human, or group of humans, is.

2. Likewise, in America, we have a Constitution (just curious -- have you ever read it?) and laws enacted and enforced, derived from it, whose entire purpose is to mitigate (as an attorney might put it) "Might v. Right". Why do you think we have a bicameral legislature wherein the Senate guarantees that "mighty" states don't overpower "lesser" ones, thanks to the Senate?

-- Or how about Gore getting 300,000 more votes than Bush? Which was right and which was might?

3. My POINT is that we are, NOMINALLY, a nation of laws, in a community of nations tied together by agreements with the force of laws. My comments (which you presumably deem "anti-American") are about adhering to law and treaty.

Now, I've loved people who have done wrong, and loved them after. Just because I disagree with a guy who "won" an election by NEGATIVE 300,000 votes -- and who floated his candy-ass through the Texas Air National Guard during the Vietnam war -- AND (worst of all!) seems intent upon shredding the Constitution for kitty litter -- DOESN'T mean I don't love America -- AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT MEANS QUITE THE OPPOSITE!

BTW -- I live in lower Manhattan, and spent three days breathing in what I knew to be the fumes of corpses of people I used to work with. I want the bastards behind that act of terror dead very, very badly, only NOT -- NEVER, EVER! -- at the cost of what I believe makes this country worth fighting and dying for in the first place!

-- Which pretty much defines my value structure, be it here or in the Middle East.

-- Oh, BTW Cyclotron7, I've got a can of gasoline -- Got a match?

-O.

[redstar1]

I think the over-indulgent anti-terrorism stance taken by the US post 9/11 sickens a lot of people around the world. It sickens me. For years American businessmen, politicians and industry have been pumping money into Irish terrorism, leading to many many deaths that could otherwise have been avoided had the US not 'sympathised' with terrorists.

Now I don't condone terrorism in any shape or form, and I certainly don't have a chip on my shoulder about the US. I just ask people to remember that your sympathy is another persons murder.

D

[KoalaBear33]

One thing that everyone is forgetting is that the civ decisions are not made on merit. Most of the civs in the game right now are basically there to sell the game. They are foremost a marketing tool. If you ask Firaxis they will probably say the same thing (although they might not disclose it publically).

Civs like the Germans, Koreans, etc are simply there to sell the game. These markets are where people buy games and so they are there.

The only time the civs were there due to merit was Civilization (one)--the original one. Back then I actually felt that the civs (like Incas, Aztec, etc) were there due to their importance in human history.

KoalaBear33

[Traelin]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
traelin,

i think the vast majority of the people around here agrees, that terrorism is bad and must be fought against.

the problem i have is when it comes to decide what's terrorism and what not. and to say who's bad and who's not. that is exactly what bush is doing by himself (well... with his administration of course).

That's not really true. Great Britain, Australia, and Canada are definitely behind us. Australia got shaken up by the Bali incident (10/12), but I think they are especially clear now on the situation.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
we (most europeans) don't mind him fighting evil, but we criticise his methods and motives.
- if you want to get rid of evil dictators, get rid of all of them (equal stakes for all).

His motives and methods are simple. Crush any terrorist or terrorist regime that threatens the existance of the U.S., and do so completely and thoroughly. I agree that all evil dictators and terrorists should be annihilated, but the U.S. is only responsible for those that affect it. It's time we start forcing others to do the same for us as we have for them. If they help us militarily and financially, we'll do the same.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
- if you want to reduce WoMD, start by giving a good example (e.g. getting rid of your own)

What's WoMD?

Originally posted by sabrewolf
- don't mix up fight for independence with terrorism

I'm not. One thing about America that distinguishes it from every other country in the world is that we value liberty above everything else. Threaten our liberty and we'll shove a sword in your face. As Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death!"

Originally posted by sabrewolf
- don't go by yourselves. if the majority of the world nations is against something, most probably YOU are wrong and not all others. that's the reason for your so called "U.S. bashing".

That's very untrue. The majority of the world is living in backwards, dictatorial regimes where they have no rights whatsoever. Why should I value what a Mideastern terrorist sympathizer thinks? As far as I'm concerned, he/she is worthless.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
you (yourself, but also bush&co.) as a catholic (or generally christian) believe in "under god everyone is the same"... and you consider democracy the best governement. so that means, that everyone has the same rights. so why are you so sure, you're right and all others are wrong?

No no. We as Christians believe everyone was created in the "image and likeness of God". People are generally good, but those that are evil must be dealt with. I really don't believe in the death penalty anymore. I used to, but I'm just not so sure about it anymore. However, for me to assume that death will not be visited upon terrorists is a pipe dream. Yeah, I'd like to round them all up and put them to ridiculously hard manual labor in the Klondike, but that's not reality.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
please answer me honestly: do you think the opinion of an american is more worth than the opinion of 10 foreigners?

Hrm, from which country are the foreigners? If you're talking Saudi Arabia, then I would say the average Westerner's opinion is more important than 100 of its average citizens' opinions.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
- state terrorism is also terrorism - even if performed by an ally and friend

I agree, that's why Iraq must be crushed into submission.

Originally posted by sabrewolf
the rest of the world also want's to get rid of terrorism, but we prefer to use sustainable methods. we want to eliminate the root of evil (poverty, big influence of radicals, no-future-mentality, etc.).
terrorism is like an illness. if you only kill the terrorists, it's like taking drugs against the pain. but the infection is still there and the pain will return sooner or later.... again and again and again... sometimes you just have to consider a "real" treatment, like antibiotics or an operation.

The majority of the world thinks economic sanctions and peacekeeping will solve the problem. This has been proven wrong time and time and time again. I now see why smarter men than me said, "There can be only be peace through war."

[KoalaBear33]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Ozymandias, nice anti american sentiments,

Why do conservatives always revert to namecalling instead of actually making a valid point. Is it because you don't have a valid poitn? Anti-American? LOL As Noam Chomsky says, the concept of anti-nationalism is a concept unheard of in democratic progressive socieites. The Soviets used to label any criticism as anti-Soviet (not anti-Communist) because it appeals to nationalist senses. Ever wonder why no one ever says "anti-Canadian", "anti-German", "anti-Italian", "anti-Chinese" or whatever?

As far as might making right... well, soon that is going to be an antiquated concept... warmongers like yourself are a dying breed...

KoalaBear33

[Traelin]

Originally posted by redstar1
I think the over-indulgent anti-terrorism stance taken by the US post 9/11 sickens a lot of people around the world. It sickens me. For years American businessmen, politicians and industry have been pumping money into Irish terrorism, leading to many many deaths that could otherwise have been avoided had the US not 'sympathised' with terrorists.

Now I don't condone terrorism in any shape or form, and I certainly don't have a chip on my shoulder about the US. I just ask people to remember that your sympathy is another persons murder.

D

Could you show me specific evidence of this? I'm not doubting that some businessmen probably had ties to terrorists, but many businessmen in many countries do this all the time. It's wrong and it sux, but it's life. Plus I guarantee that we dumped more money in Britain's lap to fight terrorism and for other things over the years than any American businessmen has for the IRA. Not that that excuses it. But I'm just curious, why does everyone remember the $1 that went to a corrupt terrorist, and not the $1 million that goes to fight him?

This is kinda what I mean about the discontent toward America. I should be the one that's annoyed, because my taxpayer dollars go to some cheeseball dictator in South America who says he's gonna fight against cartels, for example. But when it comes to repaying those favors is when you can tell who your true friends are. Much like our individual acquaintances IRL. IMHO we should stop giving foreign aid to every country except Britain, Australia, Canada, Israel, Russia, and Japan. Let the rest of the world deal with its own problems, and we'll deal with ours. At least until we as the taxpayers see some visible sign of appreciation.

EDIT: Oops, I forgot to mention S. Korea and New Zealand (for their awesome zoology projects).