Jump to content

narboza22's Content

There have been 269 items by narboza22 (Search limited from 06-August 19)

By content type

See this member's

Sort by                Order  

#557845 25 years later and still relevant.

Posted by narboza22 on 10 January 2008 - 05:13 PM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

Don't lecture me Kacen.

#557652 25 years later and still relevant.

Posted by narboza22 on 10 January 2008 - 06:06 AM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

Reagan is the most asshole president USA has ever had.. maybe beaten by Bush dad and son. Funded Iraq against Iran at the same time it sold weapons to Iran. They trained some of these franksteins like Saddam and Bin Laden. Not to mention that he barely knew any country in the globe. The dumbass confused Brazil with Bolivia, when talking to the brazilian president in a meeting in Brasilia. Is he so dumb to not even know where is he going to?

Honestly, I don't know which was the best president USA ever had, but I am sure it wasn't Ronald Reagan.

Huh, funny how most Americans would disagree with you there.

#554807 Parenting vs. Abuse

Posted by narboza22 on 04 January 2008 - 06:41 AM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

If you cannot solve problems with words and have to resort to physical means to communicate with people, then you should not have children. While I agree that parents have to be parents, and not friends, if you use violence to teach/control/discipline/whatever your child, then you are sending a terrible message to your kid. Sure, smacking a kid might get him to never draw on the wall again, and you say that it won't cause the kid any problems. I disagree. For the rest of his life, that kid will associate messing up with getting hit. Is that really what you want him to think? I would rather have a kid who is willing to come clean about his mistakes because he knows he won't get his ass kicked for it. You can fix crayon marks on a wall in about 30 seconds. People with abusive parents can go to therapy for years and still be messed up for the rest of their lives.

Look at it this way, if you hit someone in public, you can go to jail for assault or battery or whatever, so why on earth should it be ok for you to hit a child? Its also illegal for other adults to hit your child(ie. no corporal punishment in schools), so again, why should it be ok for you to hit your kid? I mean, if I had a kid, or hell, even my little brother for example, and I saw someone hit him, I would flip out.

I was reading something about this in a magazine(at the dentist, no idea what magazine it was) recently and it talked about parenting with a "carrot and stick" method. IMO, it should be a "carrot or no carrot" method. Good behavior should be rewarded, and bad behavior should be punished by sanctions, for lack of a better word, not by physical force.

#554586 p0rnography

Posted by narboza22 on 03 January 2008 - 09:47 PM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

I realize that porn is illegal for under 18 viewers, but I'm always amazed by how big a deal adults make about it. I'm a freshman in college so I just went through middle school and high school, and let me tell you, the shit that goes on between teenagers is going to fuck kids up A LOT more than porn will. If my parents spent a single day in my high school, they would have locked me in the basement and thrown away the key. I think that most adults are way out of touch with the reality of today's culture/society. Instead of trying to figure out ways to block kids from porn, which kids will always manage to get around anyway, people should focus on what's happening in the real world. I mean, jesus, who cares about internet porn, when kids just go to parties every weekend, get completely drunk, and try their hardest to reenact that porn. And then they drive home. IMO, the real problem is not kids watching strangers get it on over the internet, but rather the fact that high school has more alcoholics than a rehab clinic, and those people are not just jacking off in their rooms, they're actually having sex. If I was a parent, I would rather risk my kid getting carpel tunnel syndrome from masturbating too much rather than risk my kid getting a STD, pregnant, or both.

#554579 Parenting vs. Abuse

Posted by narboza22 on 03 January 2008 - 09:30 PM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

From my point of view, you should never hit your kids. It will come back to you if you do. My uncle and aunt hit their kids(ages 3 and 7 IIRC) and those kids are the worst behaved kids I have ever seen. In addition to not controlling the kids, my aunt and uncle have very little respect from the rest of my family anymore. Someone said you cannot reason with a child. I disagree. My dog knows right from wrong, and I never had to hit him in order for him to learn. Surely kids are at least as reasonable. If you have to punish them, then don't let them watch TV, or don't let them eat dessert for a week. There are plenty of ways to discipline kids without teaching them that violence is the answer. I think our society is already violent enough without having to beat our kids at home.

#547797 North Korea

Posted by narboza22 on 13 December 2007 - 06:27 PM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

Killing Kim or having China demand reforms isn't going to do anything. Everything in that country is so screwed up that it'll take decades for them to really get back on their feet. They have basically no infrastructure, no agriculture, no NGO's that I know of to help fix the problem...

What's dumb is that the rest of the world seems to think that dumbing a couple million tons of fuel oil into the country is actually going to help the people in the DPRK. All that does is let Kim maintain his rule a little while longer.

And even if/when Kim loses power, what happens then? Millions of NK refugees would just flee the country into SK or China. That's bad for all three countries.

#545309 so Iran is not making nukes

Posted by narboza22 on 06 December 2007 - 05:49 PM in GNP Duke_Qa

I wish I was dictator, I'd change the world so much you can't imagine, even If I kill millions of people, I'd die knowing I made a change...

Right there, Adolf!

Where is the board rule that allows us to ban people because of sick ideologies when you need it the most?
Honestly, I never insulted people personally on this board before, but I bet the court psychiatrist will/would have his delight in finding out what went wrong in your childhood...

Well bring the psychiatrists and the ban-sticks over this way first. Even though his sick ideologies may not appeal to you, I'd probably definitely go much further. I'd have no problem with systematically wipe out seemingly random countries with malicious intent for a higher cause.

Edit: I notice how America doesn't give a fuck about any white, Christian countries having nuclear capabilities

Mostly because the white Christian countries don't have leaders who say they want to wipe other countries off the map.

#545137 so Iran is not making nukes

Posted by narboza22 on 06 December 2007 - 07:38 AM in GNP Duke_Qa


#544926 so Iran is not making nukes

Posted by narboza22 on 05 December 2007 - 08:06 PM in GNP Duke_Qa

I wonder what's going to happen in 2008 when Bush leaves? Since he's not going to be there for all of you to make wise cracks about his intelligence and supposedly evil agenda, maybe we can attack Hillary for being a woman, or Obama for being Black, or Romney because he's a Mormon, surely that on this forum is worse than speaking like a Texan. By the way, I have yet to figure out how Bush can be labeled as a moron in one thread and then an evil genius puppet master behind his NeoCon Wars of Imperialist Expansion in another.

But back on topic, why do all of you seize this opportunity to make another stab at Bush? He has consistently advocated for a peaceful solution to the stand off with Iran, and now that there is an NIE out that offers a way to defuse the situation, you guys just see it as Bush screwing up again. I see it as the US making a last ditch attempt to salvage negotiations after what Iran said that all the talks were irrelevant at the last meeting: http://www.iht.com/a...africa/iran.php

#544619 Chavez Shut Up

Posted by narboza22 on 05 December 2007 - 02:11 AM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

I dont see why everyone is bitching about Chavez and Putin. You forget that both Russia and Venezuala are democracies.

Chavez just lost a vote (yes, a vote where the people are free to decide their own future), and Putin just won a vote. Chavez's loss proves that Venezuala is still a democracy...if Chavez was really a dictator, would he allow a referendum on the country's course of action? A referendum that was obvously fair enough so that the government could LOSE?

In the Russian election, pro-Putin parties gained 80% support, while anti-Putin parties gained only 20% support.

Im sure its HIGHLY realistic to assume that this 60% gap was caused only by meddling and censorship by the government....</sarcasm>

Face it people....Putin and Chavez are not only popular because they "deceive" the majority of the population, its because they do what the majority of the population wants done....I'm pretty sure doing what the people wants is called a democracy and not a dictatorship...

Putin and the United Russia Party won an election that was plagued by dirty tactics and messed up voting, a UR spokesman even admitted that. The fact that Putin is popular does not make him a democratic leader. Lots of people liked Hitler and even more people loved Mao, so lets get realistic. Democracy is based on the system, not the leader.

Chavez lost because of the system that lets people protect their freedoms. That is democracy. The people said no to his undemocratic reforms.

Saying that democracy is simply "doing what the people want" is incredibly simply minded. Robert Dahl listed 7 things as a definition of democracy:
-Elected Officials in power
-Free and Fair elections
-Inclusive suffrage
-Universal right to run for office
-Freedom of expression
-Alternative sources of information
-Associational autonomy

If you fit all of that, then you are a true democracy, but if you just "do what the people want," you are democratic. Countless dictators, monarchs, and emperors would fit your definition of democracy.

No, democracy is doing what the US government wants.

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? By your standard, there must only be about 5 democracies in the world. I'm sure glad that's not true.

#541853 Saudi Court ups Punishment for Gang-rape victim

Posted by narboza22 on 27 November 2007 - 01:46 AM in GNP The O'Really Factor

Sometimes some sacrifices must be made in the name of justice, peace and freedom. But he is strong and just who has nothing more to lose.

Cut them off from all resources. They might cut off their oil, but I doubt they can survive in total isolation. Once they see they have nothing we want, they might be easier to persuade in an attempt to seek bargain material. I believe war is not an option, but there are plenty more methods of diplomacy.

The US and Europe could completely ignore the Saudis for the rest of eternity and they would be just fine, until the oil runs out. That is because regardless of western moral values, China would jump at any opportunity to be the only guy buying oil from the Kingdom. They aren't going to cut off relations over a silly little thing like human rights abuses.

#541342 Saudi Court ups Punishment for Gang-rape victim

Posted by narboza22 on 25 November 2007 - 10:43 PM in GNP The O'Really Factor

Wait for the oil to run out or come up with a new way to fuel the modern world.

#541283 Saudi Court ups Punishment for Gang-rape victim

Posted by narboza22 on 25 November 2007 - 09:12 PM in GNP The O'Really Factor

I cannot believe headlines like these:

Does the media really have nothing better to do than keep stats on crap like this?

edited for spelling

#540920 isnt this sacred either!?!

Posted by narboza22 on 25 November 2007 - 12:16 AM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

lol, these forums are amazing. We can go from singling out as Hostile as a racist pig who hates Muslims (http://forums.revora...showtopic=55141) to this thread where we think up toys based on racist stereotypes, all while staring hypocrisy in the face and laughing. Go figure :)

#539460 Saudi Court ups Punishment for Gang-rape victim

Posted by narboza22 on 21 November 2007 - 01:17 AM in GNP The O'Really Factor

The basis behind American policy ever since WWII has been hypocrisy....

The United States government doesn't give a shit about human rights.

The problem is that we have no options.

So what if the general population wants the west to take action on Saud Arabia's brutal Islamic law? The left-wing parties we have seem to disagree with anything confrontational, and the right-wing parties only confront these brutalities if it suits their own selfish interests.

I am growing steadily more dissatisfied with the way the world is being run....

What general population wants to take action on the Saudis? Sure people think its terrible what's happening to that woman and her lawyer, and the countless other similar cases, but if you gave the average person the choice between 1) standing up for their ideals and doing something to change the Saudi's ways, which would destroy the flow of oil to the west and directly effective that average person's life in a negative way, or 2) that average person could simply stand by and watch it happen, while thinking its terrible, but not have their lives negatively effected, the average person would choose #2 because people look out for themselves first and foremost.

#538950 Morality (involves extreme stuff)

Posted by narboza22 on 19 November 2007 - 09:33 PM in Current Events, Politics, Philosophy

If you local news stations are anything like the ones in the US, give them the info and they will crucify the police, those other guys, and anyone who might be remotely involved.

#538190 Saudi Court ups Punishment for Gang-rape victim

Posted by narboza22 on 18 November 2007 - 04:32 AM in GNP The O'Really Factor

And what would the alternative be? Stop supporting the Saudis and run the risk of cutting of the flow of oil? Sure reality sucks, but reality is what it is. The world runs on oil ATM and until someone comes up with an alternative, the world is stuck with stuff like this.

Of course, someone could also decide to intervene, but who is going to do that? Everything the US does these days is condemned as imperialist expansion or some similar bullshit. Or maybe Europe like you mentioned, but the chances of them getting their act together long enough to accomplish anything is next to nothing. China and Russia both rival Saudi Arabia in terms of human rights abuses, so they sure as hell aren't going to involved.

In all honesty, the majority of people who complain about how the US turns a blind eye to this would instantly condemn any actions the US took to stop it. It wouldn't even have to be military intervention, just something that would cause a hiccup in the flow of oil.

And even in a perfect world where Europe was gung ho enough to leave their continent and the US was ready to abandon the Saudis, what would they do? Put sanctions on Saudi Arabia? That would hurt the rest of the world just as much as it would hurt the Saudis. Invade? That would only infinitely multiply the amount of extremist Muslims who have it out for us infidels. Maybe we would just hold a press conference and explain that how our Judeo-Christian values make us morally opposed to such actions and that we would really appreciate it if the Saudis would stop raping and whipping people. In which case the Saudis would say that they will consider the matter and review the case, which would simply take long enough for this story to be forgotten by the media.

You say that we live in a modern society where this should not be accepted. Well, the Middle East is not a modern society, and the same "not understanding the culture" that caused all of the problems in Iraq applies here. Yes this seems completely illogical and barbaric to us, but so does suicide bombing markets full of our own people.

#538100 I Support Interventionist Wars!

Posted by narboza22 on 17 November 2007 - 09:45 PM in GNP Articles

I think South Koreans, Haitians, Kuwaitis, and people in Kosovo would disagree with you.

#537822 I Support Interventionist Wars!

Posted by narboza22 on 17 November 2007 - 04:20 AM in GNP Articles

You have a very interesting perspective on life if you think that being under Soviet rule was a good thing. ~Narboza

Do you even know? I'm sure the both are of you are too young to remember. I was in Russia is 1990 after the fall of communism. Thier shelves were bare, we were not even allowed to cash in more than $25 worth of US currency to rubles. Because of it's buying power. We were not allowed to buy electronics over there because it was so dirt cheap because of government set prices. It was a freaking economical mess.

I was basing my statement on what my dad told me, who did business in Moscow while it was still the Soviet capital. From what he described, life would be hard pressed to get crappier than how it was in the USSR.

edited to fix quote

#537608 I Support Interventionist Wars!

Posted by narboza22 on 16 November 2007 - 05:52 PM in GNP Articles

And yes, America was fighting communism worldwide. Why? It wasn't communism that endangered America. It was the possibility the USSR might throw nukes its way. That was nothing to do with political ideology, just pure morbid fear.

That makes absolutely no sense. How would hindering Soviet expansion ease tensions between the USSR and US and make a nuclear exchange less likely? The US fought communism because of the Truman Doctrine. That was a policy based purely on political and economic reasons.

#537428 I Support Interventionist Wars!

Posted by narboza22 on 16 November 2007 - 04:05 AM in GNP Articles

How can you even think of justifyng Amerca's support for these tyrants because "communism was the greater evil".

Under the soviet occupation women and the lower class actually had accessible health care and education. How can you possibly think that the shit the Taliban put Afghanistan through was a lesser evel than communism. The americans knew this in the 1980's as well as I do now.

The american support of the Mujahideen in afghanistan is a perfect example of irresponsible intervention.

You have a very interesting perspective on life if you think that being under Soviet rule was a good thing. But that's beside the point. From the Western perspective, communism was the enemy, and US policy was to fight it whenever possible. Again, you're missing the bigger picture. It was not just fighting communism in Afghanistan, it was fighting communism all over the world.

#537399 I Support Interventionist Wars!

Posted by narboza22 on 16 November 2007 - 02:24 AM in GNP Articles

Why did the west support those people? Simply, at the time, communism was the greater evil. What you are saying sounds good when you say all of that out of context, but you have to look at the bigger picture. The world is not an ideological paradise where countries have the ability to see the future and therefore always chose the best course of action for the long term good of humanity.

#537248 Iran, to Expand its Enrichment Program to up to 54k Centrifuges

Posted by narboza22 on 15 November 2007 - 07:45 PM in GNP The O'Really Factor

Are you defining WW3 as Armageddon? WW3 imo would be any nuclear exchange and the conventional war that would follow it.

#537198 Iran, to Expand its Enrichment Program to up to 54k Centrifuges

Posted by narboza22 on 15 November 2007 - 06:31 PM in GNP The O'Really Factor

Why would you need more than 1 nuclear weapon in order to start WW3? One nuclear blast in Israel, the US, Russia, China... would draw retailiation.

#534654 Iran, to Expand its Enrichment Program to up to 54k Centrifuges

Posted by narboza22 on 09 November 2007 - 07:06 PM in GNP The O'Really Factor

Somehow I'd imagine the people under the mushroom cloud would consider it a nuclear attack regardless of the kilotonage. Besides, the Oklahoma City bombing was a huge blast, that's nothing to scoff at. It you could reproduce that kind of destruction with a suitcase instead of a big truck, then you have a very potent weapon.