Poll

What is worse?

Appeasement47%47% - 38
Millions of dead people52%52% - 42
Total: 80
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6844|Nårvei

sergeriver wrote:

Varegg wrote:

sergeriver wrote:


According to some people's dictionary it could be.  I agree that isn't appeasement but PC.
That's why we made as much as 31 pages or so in the other thread.

About that exact issue my opinion is that it appeases the general Muslim population telling them we diffrentiate between the religion and the radical elements, we don't appease radical Islam by calling it anti-Islamic activities.
Of course not, you are being respectful to the 99% moderate Muslims and making look the radical ones as opposed to the moderate.
I hope you just didn't disguise this as a follow up thread to the other one
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6791|Argentina

Varegg wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Varegg wrote:


That's why we made as much as 31 pages or so in the other thread.

About that exact issue my opinion is that it appeases the general Muslim population telling them we diffrentiate between the religion and the radical elements, we don't appease radical Islam by calling it anti-Islamic activities.
Of course not, you are being respectful to the 99% moderate Muslims and making look the radical ones as opposed to the moderate.
I hope you just didn't disguise this as a follow up thread to the other one
Lol, no, I don't think any of us wants another 30 pages of semantics tbh.
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|6875|Cologne, Germany

sergeriver wrote:

A-You must call terrorism anti-Islamic activities.
well, if it's either that or millions of dead people, appeasement, obviously.


sergeriver wrote:

B-You must remove some missiles from the border of a country far away from home.
appeasement. No missiles can be important enough to justify letting millions of your fellow countrymen die. You can always set them up elsewhere, or handle the issue differently.

sergeriver wrote:

C-You must recognize the independence of a Middle East state.
that's all ? appeasement.

sergeriver wrote:

D-You must take your support to a Middle East state away.
depends. are we contractually obliged to support that state ? if not, I'd say my own people are more important than other people. appeasement

sergeriver wrote:

E-You must set a bunch of terrorists free from jail.
if the alternative to that is that millions of people surely die, release them. The problem with such a decision, of course, is that you can never know what the ramifications of such a move could be. The same applies to B, C and D, obviously. On the other hand, you can always capture the terrorists again. But you cannot bring back millions of your own people. So I guess that's a no-brainer. Appeasement.

sergeriver wrote:

F-You must give your liberty away.
that's about the only issue where appeasement cannot help bring satisfactory results. And probably one of the few things that might be worth letting millions of people die for. At least that is what history would indicate. No appeasement.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6678
Ill let them bang my sister too.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|6844|Nårvei

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Ill let them bang my sister too.
Stay on topic please ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Left_hand
Banned
+11|6200|Westminster, California

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Ill let them bang my sister too.
I would be grateful if you could not post such vulgar comments please.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6791|Argentina

Left_hand wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Ill let them bang my sister too.
I would be grateful if you could not post such vulgar comments please.
It's ok.  He called me Mexican, anti-Semite working under the payroll of some kind of organization, nazi, anti-American, moron, geek, racist, bigot, asshole, pussy, little girl, so that's really nothing compared to those insults (not that being Mexican is an insult anyway, but I'm not that).

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-01-28 07:02:25)

Left_hand
Banned
+11|6200|Westminster, California

sergeriver wrote:

Left_hand wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Ill let them bang my sister too.
I would be grateful if you could not post such vulgar comments please.
It's ok.  He called me Mexican, anti-Semite, nazi, anti-American, moron, geek, bigot, asshole, pussy, little girl, so that's really nothing compared to those insults (not that being a Mexican is an insult).
Well frankly i am astonished someone would post such vulgarities.  Have people no manners in this day and age?

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.

Thanks and regards,

LH
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|6681

Left_hand wrote:

Well frankly i am astonished someone would post such vulgarities.  Have people no manners in this day and age?

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.

Thanks and regards,

LH
wow dude. I suggest growing some thicker skin. Otherwise you won't last too long on the internet. You sound like someone whos been sheltered from reality.

Last edited by Ajax_the_Great1 (2008-01-28 07:14:25)

SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6164|North Tonawanda, NY
I will answer these, but they seem absolutely absurd.  What kind of group would demand "Use a different phrase or millions die"?  I would not want to have them around making absurd demands.

sergeriver wrote:

A-You must call terrorism anti-Islamic activities.
See, I don't get this one.  Not all terrorists are Muslim.  Do we say that those who bomb Planned Parenthoods are not terrorists, but "anti-Christian activities"?  But in a case where it is "Use a different word or millions die", I would probably use a different word.  But I can't really fathom such a choice as being near realistic.

sergeriver wrote:

B-You must remove some missiles from the border of a country far away from home.
Move the missiles.  Thats what missile boats and ICBMs are for.

sergeriver wrote:

C-You must recognize the independence of a Middle East state.
As in, "Recognize Palestine or millions die"?  Again, I can't see that being a legitimate choice...

sergeriver wrote:

D-You must take your support to a Middle East state away.
As in, "Stop supporting Israel or millions die"?  I don't like how much support the US gives them anyway.  But it's really a case by case basis.

sergeriver wrote:

E-You must set a bunch of terrorists free from jail.
No.

sergeriver wrote:

F-You must give your liberty away.
No.  Not a chance.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6164|North Tonawanda, NY

Left_hand wrote:

Well frankly i am astonished someone would post such vulgarities.  Have people no manners in this day and age?

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.

Thanks and regards,

LH
Take it easy there, slick.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6257|Escea

sergeriver wrote:

A-You must call terrorism anti-Islamic activities.
Nope

sergeriver wrote:

B-You must remove some missiles from the border of a country far away from home.
Nope

sergeriver wrote:

C-You must recognize the independence of a Middle East state.
Only if it can prove it can do it without lobbing rockets at civvies.

sergeriver wrote:

D-You must take your support to a Middle East state away.
Nope

sergeriver wrote:

E-You must set a bunch of terrorists free from jail.
Nope

sergeriver wrote:

F-You must give your liberty away.
Absolutely not.
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6557|...

"Millions of dead people" is clearly worse.

You are starting with the faulty premise that appeasement always leads to the saving of lives? Not everyone is Pope Leo III.

A good topic would be "Does appeasement fail more or succeed more".
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6791|Argentina

jsnipy wrote:

"Millions of dead people" is clearly worse.

You are starting with the faulty premise that appeasement always leads to the saving of lives? Not everyone is Pope Leo III.

A good topic would be "Does appeasement fail more or succeed more".
There's no need since most people would let millions die, you have your answer there.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6164|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:

There's no need since most people would let millions die, you have your answer there.
You trivialize the whole poll with the examples given.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|6791|Argentina

SenorToenails wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

There's no need since most people would let millions die, you have your answer there.
You trivialize the whole poll with the examples given.
The original post had no examples, I added them because people asked for them.  Did you read the 30 pages threads about semantics and appeasement by Lowing?  Well, the first example is just that.  To me that is not appesement, but when people decided it is, call it appeasement if you want.
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6479|The Land of Scott Walker
Appeasement would only succeed in saving lives if one is dealing with a rational person or group of people.  If one is not dealing with people such as this, millions would die anyway ...
Dersmikner
Member
+147|6532|Texas
It's nearly a trick question, without intending to be.

When you appease a tyrant or a tyrannical group, you embolden them and you only put off the inevitable. Do you think Hitler would have stopped at Poland had we said "hey big guy, that's okay, just stay out of the rest of Europe and we'll call it a draw"? Hell no he wouldn't have.

The trick to this question is that you can have millions dead now, and remove your enemy from the planet, or you can appease your enemy and have millions dead later, possibly more in the latter scenario. There are going to be casualties either way, my feeling is that you limit them by taking charge right now. Further, if you appease Nutgroup 1, you give Nutgroup 2 license to use similar tactics because you're proven they work. "Hey, the Muslims blew shit up and got what they wanted, maybe we should do the same." Bad idea. Appeasement is ALWAYS a bad idea. Honestly come to some sort of conclusion about what the right thing to do is, and then stand by that irrespective of the consequences.
S.Lythberg
Mastermind
+429|6481|Chicago, IL
When in the course of history has appeasement done anything other than delay the inevitable?

"I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees" -Emiliano Zapata
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6164|North Tonawanda, NY

sergeriver wrote:

The original post had no examples, I added them because people asked for them.  Did you read the 30 pages threads about semantics and appeasement by Lowing?  Well, the first example is just that.  To me that is not appesement, but when people decided it is, call it appeasement if you want.
I know what you kind of poll you wanted for this, but such hypothetical situations are unrealistic.  And you know it.

Any group that would demand such trivial things in exchange for the lives of millions is not a group that should go unopposed.  That is probably why most people say "millions will die" as opposed to "appease them".
Left_hand
Banned
+11|6200|Westminster, California

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Left_hand wrote:

Well frankly i am astonished someone would post such vulgarities.  Have people no manners in this day and age?

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.

Thanks and regards,

LH
wow dude. I suggest growing some thicker skin. Otherwise you won't last too long on the internet. You sound like someone whos been sheltered from reality.
BF2s forums is reality? From where i come from openly referring to people as a Nazi, anti-American etcetera would get you a punch in the mouth.

The level of abuse that is tolerated within these boards is disgusting and the participants the actively indulge in this wanton filth should be ashamed of themselves.  Thoroughly.

Thanks and regards,

LH
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|6750

Left_hand wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Left_hand wrote:


I would be grateful if you could not post such vulgar comments please.
It's ok.  He called me Mexican, anti-Semite, nazi, anti-American, moron, geek, bigot, asshole, pussy, little girl, so that's really nothing compared to those insults (not that being a Mexican is an insult).
Well frankly i am astonished someone would post such vulgarities.  Have people no manners in this day and age?

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.

Thanks and regards,

LH
Welcome to the internet... lol     Hope you had a nice 40 year nap... I too am outraged by people who speak of banging one anothers sisters...

and to the OP... this poll is skewed...  appease or a bunch of people die...?   doesnt work like that...  It's like a murderer standing outside and saying... if you let me in... i promise not to kill you...
Love is the answer
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6796

Left_hand wrote:

Gunslinger OIF II, i don't know you but i am not very happy with your alleged behaviour.  I would ask you to be more respectful.
Oh shut the hell up.  Grow some hair on your nuts and harden the fuck up.
Snorkelfarsan
Soup Boy
+32|6640|Stockholm, Sweden
Winston Churchill said this:

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last."

Although this is not true all the time.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|6796

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Ill let them bang my sister too.
Hmmm... well that would be part of the appeasement process.  We might as well bend over also.  It could be one big appeasement orgy.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard