Debate Thread

Dew mentioned KONY 90210 in TTBM and apparently I'm now obliged to therefore post this link to visiblechildren. I didn't want to take TTBM off-topic, so I figured I'd stick it in here.

What's everyone think about this Kony 2012 business?
To be honest, I had not heard anything at all about this until, well, three hours ago; it seems news of this exploded overnight.

I heard about it a couple of hours ago. Honestly? It's not that big of a deal. He's just another African warlord.

It's really not like this is some big thing. They've been doing stuff like this for years and years.

Forever, actually.

I don't see why people are getting so worked up about it now.

My knowledge about the situation in Uganda was minimal before this hit. All I knew was that the LRA was about crazy fucks who thought they were doing God's work, they had child soldiers and sex slaves, and that the rest of the world really didn't care enough to help them all that much.

Now I know that they've been pushed out of Uganda for the most part apparently, and now everyone is trying to keep interest high in order to make sure we catch Joseph Kony.

My personal thoughts are that I hope we catch the fucker, but then go further than that. I read an article regarding the whole campaign, and it said that basically Kony is only the first step, and that we need to not only stop the LRA and groups like them, but we can't just keep sending aid. We need to help African nations like Uganda become more self-sufficient because apparently, it's gotten to a point where apparently Uganda is relying on handouts as a critical part of its economy.
We certainly shouldn't abandon them once we get Kony, but we also need to think ahead at actually helping these people in much more lasting ways.

Top Hat Zebra wrote:I heard about it a couple of hours ago. Honestly? It's not that big of a deal. He's just another African warlord.

It's really not like this is some big thing. They've been doing stuff like this for years and years.

Forever, actually.

I don't see why people are getting so worked up about it now.

It's better that people get worked up about it now and do something about it then just keep on ignoring it and letting the LRA go on about its merry, fucking horrifying way.

Look, this is going to sound really harsh, but.... Let them handle their own shit. They use child soldiers, so what? People have used child soldier throughout history.


It's not our duty to police the world. We really need to stop butting in where we don't belong.


On the other hand, it's a good opportunity to set up some nice puppet states!

I don't think any one country should butt in all by itself but isn't this sort of thing basically why we have the UN?

Also, it does indeed bug me that people are just jumping on the bandwagon - however it is a good bandwagon but they should be on this particular one the whole time.

Ugh. I hate the UN. The idea that you can govern a nation like you can a person is stupid.


I hate to say it, but I sort of agree with that one idiot from Dew's post in the TTBM thread. Let someone else deal with it this time. We have our own problems to consider.

There's just no right way to really solve a conflict like that. There will always be more bitching about how it's handled. Sure, this raises awareness, and then what? The UN is a tangled web of diplomacy and doesn't act until there's no other way.
You can't invade the place, clean up this guy and call it a day, both because there will just be another guy who takes his place and because any military action here would without a doubt require shooting children and the inevitable outrage this will cause.
You just know this viral campaign is going to fade from public memory again in a few weeks, and nothing will be done, because that's apparently how the world works.

Unless you're fighting The Nazis 2.0, you're always one step away from being the evil child-killing invader. If you do nothing you're a heartless jerk, but if you use diplomacy and negotiations, you can look like you're trying to help without any of the hassle of actually helping.

I ended this post because I had to eat and was intending on finishing it now, but I don't think I had a real point to make, just a bit of a rant.

Oh, I don't know. I think it made a lot of sense.

I thought this was worthy of debate:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=528354

Wowza; Totally Wars, that's a blast from the past. Rome was my favourite game for, like, three years.

I suppose I'll just cover "do you have the right to die?"
I feel everyone should be free to do whatever they want regarding their own person; if they want to die faster it's not my duty to stop them or lecture them.
It's pretty much that simple, to me.

Whether or not I agree with that person's decision to kill themselves is a completely different matter.

Exactly. I agree.

A discussion would be in place, tough I think the patient would have thought over it very well. A lecture about "why you shouldn't" is not respectful.

A discussion is fair game, I agree.

Right. Outright denying it is.... Well, morally wrong. In my opinion. I mean, who are you to decide?

If you know you're going to die anyway and you're lucid enough to know what you're saying, I don't see what the problem is, or why other people need to decide over what you plan to do with your life. You're not causing harm to other people.

I understand there are cases where the patient can't decide for him/herself that make this more complicated, but for the basic premise I'd like to hear an argument against this practice that doesn't involve religious convictions being forced on other people. I heard, for instance, that Santorum thought allowing euthanasia basically caused the complete breakdown of all morality, presumably because taking a life is a big old bible no-no. He used the Netherlands as an example where, apparently, they've been on an elderly-killing frenzy since the day it's been allowed.

You also have to remember the widely adhered-to maxim "First, do no harm," and that the Hippocratic Oath contains the phrase, "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect." []

(I have to point out that the Hippocratic oath is no longer really a thing, although the oaths doctors take these days are/were partially derived from it. However, the "First do no harm" part - or something to that effect - remains iirc. Not sure about not adminstering lethal drugs.)

I think you have the right to die if you are going to die anyway and you are going to be in great pain and/or become delirious or insane. Also, if you are in a coma with no chance of recovery.

Of course, the decision would have to informed - meaning that one should be lucid and have had the entire procedure explained while lucid. Perhaps talking to a psychiatrist or psychologist could be recommended/compulsory.

Ensuring you have a pre-prepared legal document stating what you would like to happen in certain situations would probably be best, in my opinion.

It's certainly what I'm planning to do, as soon as I get a job and get myself set up with a lawyer. Especially since, y'know, a seizure could possibly leave me comatose. I'd rather be dead than spend the rest of my life in a coma - hell, or even live with Alzheimers. My grandparents had Alzheimers. It's a horrible disorder.

If there's a strong chance of recovery but only with severe ongoing dehibilation, well, that gets more complicated again.

Tuomey wrote:
Of course, the decision would have to informed - meaning that one should be lucid and have had the entire procedure explained while lucid. Perhaps talking to a psychiatrist or psychologist could be recommended/compulsory.

I like that, that'd be good.
And maybe you'd have to wait a week or so before they do it; so you have time to sit back and mull it over.

Not really looking to spark a debate, but since we posted about Kony 500 earlier; did anyone else hear about that Invisible Children guy earlier today? Caught going on a rampage around L.A. San Diego or something, "unburdened" himself in public. I tried to find a citation but all the headlines have gone since this morning.

edit: linky-poo

I don't know.... I'll look tomorrow, though. This kindle cant browse worth bacon.

Harmonies, rhythm, music.

Who's the original artist? It's got a decent beat, but I can't tell what's different without the original for comparison. []

Eurobeat Odyssey, thats The Living Tombstone's mix on the previous page.

...I actually think I like the original better. Much better, in fact. []

I don't understand the pony link, but this doesn't sound too bad, though I wouldn't really look for more like it, but might enjoy it if I'd had a few drinks. I prefer the first version you posted though.

It just sounds like something that would be in the background of some weird, Japanese game. It's not something that I would consider 'listening' music.


I fI were to explain to someone, what is music, I would never give this as an example. It sounds more like a patchwork of different things, all thrown into a single track.

Also, I agree with JT. This one is far better.

I still hate it, though