News Stories

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by maplehurry

You know... this reminds me of an old debate in my university's online forum about whether it's ok to build a mosque near ground zero. It was a heated debate with many people for both sides and the debates go on for a very long time until the moderators came in and closed it.

It really seems to me it's one of those issues that's sorta subjective yet so sensitive that people can't just "tolerate" the other side to just agree to disagree.

Subjective? Of course it wasn't. As far as I know America haven't banned Islam in their country yet. The fact that some people want to do so doesn't mean there is anything to debate. There are just idiots who genuinely believe USA is a "Christian Country", when it isn't. The fact they live in a lie is their problem.

Debates last long not because both sides are equally valid. It just means neither side are willing to concede ground. If you think just because an argument went nowhere, meant the two sides are equal, then we have a problem. A side that refuse to concede when they have been proven wrong, doesn't mean they were not wrong. They still are wrong, they just refuse to admit it.

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

It's always the same people arguing the same points every time the thing comes up as well. Clogging up the news thread with a debate that no one is going to change their view or stand point on. It's been 69 years, let the dead rest and get on with something more productive.

[maplehurry]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Subjective? Of course it wasn't.

Debates last long not because both sides are equally valid. It just means neither side are willing to concede ground. If you think just because an argument went nowhere, meant the two sides are equal, then we have a problem.

In this case, I meant subjective in the sense of people who values freedom more Vs people who values harmony more. (though in the latter case I guess one can point out why some of the "pro-harmony" people would be so confrontational...)

[Tom Bombadil]

What about Hiroshima and Nakasaki?

How shameless can one be? I wonder? How dare one accuse China to play the victim card when he plays the victim card to justify the past atrocities?

Sure, innocents died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki. But they have the Imperial Japan to blame, not the Allies. It was the Imperial Japanese government who slaughtered people in their invasions. It was the Imperial Japanese government who force the woman in their occupied areas and colonies into comfort women. It was the Imperial Japanese government who experimented germ wars on humans. It was the Imperial Japanese government who encouraged people in Okinawa to commit mass suicides. Nobody f*king forced them to do any of that.

Yes, innocent people died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki, it was because the Imperial Japanese government brought it on themselves. That precisely the f**king reason why those bastard should not be worshiped in shrines.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

How shameless can one be? I wonder? How dare one accuse China to play the victim card when he plays the victim card to justify the past atrocities?

Dare what? China simply can't see past the fact that it screwed up itself domestically and had to resort to nitpick history to justify a national rally, and still continues on without realising that it is a different era and time where mindsets are different.

What can you do? Suck a thumb and chill out man.

Sure, innocents died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki. But they have the Imperial Japan to blame, not the Allies. It was the Imperial Japanese government who slaughtered people in their invasions. It was the Imperial Japanese government who force the woman in their occupied areas and colonies into comfort women. It was the Imperial Japanese government who experimented germ wars on humans. It was the Imperial Japanese government who encouraged people in Okinawa to commit mass suicides. Nobody f*king forced them to do any of that.

Yes, innocent people died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki, it was because the Imperial Japanese government brought it on themselves. That precisely the f**king reason why those bastard should not be worshiped in shrines.

大人不記小人過, 小人全杖大人扶. So China is a 大人 or 小人? That mentality simply gives detractors more ammo to use the term 小中国; so can I say that they brought that negative image upon themselves?

So why the heck are the Japanese being blamed? They are NOT the imperial Japanese of the past anymore.

And also, what makes you think the soldiers and children had the bloody choice to be indoctrinated into fighting for imperial Japan? And how the emperor was misled by Tojo?

It is like how the Red Guard had to help enforce the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Those people don't have a choice when getting marginalised socially would mean a bad end to the people around them.

That is the power of social pressure. Soldiers are simply tools of their leader - if the leader is such of an egomaniac, the tool shall be that of one wielded by an egomaniac.

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Debates last long not because both sides are equally valid. It just means neither side are willing to concede ground. If you think just because an argument went nowhere, meant the two sides are equal, then we have a problem. A side that refuse to concede when they have been proven wrong, doesn't mean they were not wrong. They still are wrong, they just refuse to admit it.

Reminds me of a saying in the workforce that goes, "If the boss doesn't admit he is wrong, he is not wrong.". From a technical debate standpoint, he/she is not wrong because there is no 100% agreement that he/she is wrong. As a participant in the issue, he is that percentage point away from a unanimous decision.

Though that doesn't mean he/she is dumb or stupid.

Originally Posted by Mr Hat and Clogs

It's always the same people arguing the same points every time the thing comes up as well. Clogging up the news thread with a debate that no one is going to change their view or stand point on. It's been 69 years, let the dead rest and get on with something more productive.

It is only 69 years. The Northern Irish and the rest of the Britain have been bickering over the Plantation of Ulstler for 405 years, the Shia and Sunni over Mecca for 1382 years, and Jewish, Christian and Muslims over Jerusalem for approximately 3891 years.

So what is 69?

[Cosmic Eagle]

SH....you should know by now the living do not really care about the dead and the message behind the tragedy of their deaths beyond using them as a rallying tool and thus are doomed to end up causing more slaughters.....It's hopeless the way people are

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

SH....you should know by now the living do not really care about the dead and the message behind the tragedy of their deaths beyond using them as a rallying tool and thus are doomed to end up causing more slaughters.....It's hopeless the way people are

Uh that is quite obvious in our generation I think, which is indeed a good thing. I don't believe in inheriting the sins of our fathers unless we are as asinine as them.

Hence why nobody gives a fuck about this. You didn't see any protest rallies.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Uh that is quite obvious in our generation I think, which is indeed a good thing. I don't believe in inheriting the sins of our fathers unless we are as asinine as them.

Hence why nobody gives a fuck about this. You didn't see any protest rallies.

I don't mean that....I mean no one really understands the pain of others dying in agony. No one really understands enough to actually understand selflessly. It's why people's deaths end up being fuel for others to die

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

I don't mean that....I mean no one really understands the pain of others dying in agony. No one really understands enough to actually understand selflessly. It's why people's deaths end up being fuel for others to die

It depends on who is looking at it. Some veterans would just be numbed to prospect of death and turn it into black comedy - "You don't have to worry about the agony of dying because you are dying anyway, and when you are dead, you can't worry. Just cherish the last moments of your life."

Remember! You are one in 7 billion people in this world. It is a statistic first and a tragedy second. 66,500,000 people die every year while 134,050,000 is born every year. If you believe in reincarnation, that is about 67,550,000 new lives created out of nowhere. If you don't, that is none of your business since you will not be longer in this world anyway.

On the humourous side, this is quite a rambling but interesting read about the China v Japan row.

[Seitsuki]

Jumped straight to comments, was not disappointed, humanity still doomed.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

Jumped straight to comments, was not disappointed, humanity still doomed.

Methinks that the world is shifting back to equilibrium since we have a high population and still no plans for space colonisation.

Given that us Chinese are now the majority race on Earth, the nuke is on us. But which area's Chinese?

[HasuMasu]

The Indians will overtake Chinese any time now...

So many Indian IT...they can sabotage all computer!

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Masuzu

The Indians will overtake Chinese any time now...

maybe if the Indian politicians can get their act together.

Chinese politicians - Corrupt but competent

Indian Politicians - Corrupt and incompetent

[monster]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Subjective? Of course it wasn't. As far as I know America haven't banned Islam in their country yet. The fact that some people want to do so doesn't mean there is anything to debate. There are just idiots who genuinely believe USA is a "Christian Country", when it isn't. The fact they live in a lie is their problem.

Debates last long not because both sides are equally valid. It just means neither side are willing to concede ground. If you think just because an argument went nowhere, meant the two sides are equal, then we have a problem. A side that refuse to concede when they have been proven wrong, doesn't mean they were not wrong. They still are wrong, they just refuse to admit it.

A debate over whether or not it's ok to build a mosque near ground zero probably has less to do with whether or not the USA is a Christian country and more to do with patriotic sentimentality against the perpetrators who (rightly or wrongly) are associated with Islam. And in that sense, I think it is quite subjective.

Of course, the non-subjective part is that anyone who legally acquires land anywhere in the USA and have all the necessary permits to build a building there may use that building for any non-criminal activities, including as a place of worship for Islam.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Jewish, Christian and Muslims over Jerusalem for approximately 3891 years.

It's probably less than 1500 years, but still a long time.

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by monster

It's probably less than 1500 years, but still a long time.

Well if one looks at is as a progressive train of problems over that city, it would be longer. First just the Jews in taking it post-Exodus and then the losing and regaining of it until the days of Rome. Following that and the creation of Christianity and Isalm, then thing get more and more complex with Crusades, raw deals, and other conflicts over the city.

[monster]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Well if one looks at is as a progressive train of problems over that city, it would be longer. First just the Jews in taking it post-Exodus and then the losing and regaining of it until the days of Rome. Following that and the creation of Christianity and Isalm, then thing get more and more complex with Crusades, raw deals, and other conflicts over the city.

Sure, I'm not saying it didn't have problems before that, and the history there is connected. I was merely specifying on the ones associated with the current major religions.

[Bri]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

No, simply because causation does not imply correalation. A soldier follows orders becuase under military law he does not have the right to question it. The executor, namely the commander in chief, is the one to be held responsible.

How right is it to vilify someone who carries out his duty in his line?

Soldiers can't always avoid (all) responsibility by just following orders. Blatant criminal orders can and should be disobeyed. The Nuremberg trails had a big effect on military law.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

maybe if the Indian politicians can get their act together.

Chinese politicians - Corrupt but competent

Indian Politicians - Corrupt and incompetent

The trend right now seems to be moving towards being like their Indian counterparts.

Otherwise there wouldn't be a diaspora out of China.

Originally Posted by Bri

Soldiers can't always avoid (all) responsibility by just following orders. Blatant criminal orders can and should be disobeyed. The Nuremberg trails had a big effect on military law.

It kind of depends on the punishment given out. The disincentive of having your sister being sold out to a lolicon is more than enough to keep soldiers in line.

[FateAnomaly]

Its only a crime if your side loses.

[Fireminer]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

It kind of depends on the punishment given out. The disincentive of having your sister being sold out to a lolicon is more than enough to keep soldiers in line.

Note: The punishment would be increased ten fold if the buyer is SaintessHeart.