In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
All is fair in LOVE and WAR?
calrugerfan
Member Posts: 18,209 ✭
I don't understand this phrase. As far as love goes, there are a lot of things my "loving" wife says are off limits. As far as war goes, why do we have the Geneva Conventions?
Seriously on the Geneva Conventions though: if the other side hasn't agreed to the same guidelines, are we still held accountable for following them? And if we decide NOT to follow them, who enforces it?
Seriously on the Geneva Conventions though: if the other side hasn't agreed to the same guidelines, are we still held accountable for following them? And if we decide NOT to follow them, who enforces it?
Comments
If war were its true, ugly self, people would be a lot less interested in waging it.
There was a Star Trek episode where a war had gone on for a few thousand years. The rules of war were such that no bombs were used, no bullets were shot, no soldiers ever took to the fields. No one was maimed, no buildings were destroyed, and there was no risk. Why? Because it was too horrible.
Instead the war was fought via computer simulations. And, if you happened to be part of the calculation where you were deemed a casualty, you reported to a death chamber where you were painlessly vaporized.
Since war was made all nice and neat, there was no incentive to end it.
Rules of war are silly. War should be made as disgusting and horrendous as possible, because, in the end, that's what it is.
If war were its true, ugly self, people would be a lot less interested in waging it.
There was a Star Trek episode where a war had gone on for a few thousand years. The rules of war were such that no bombs were used, no bullets were shot, no soldiers ever took to the fields. No one was maimed, no buildings were destroyed, and there was no risk. Why? Because it was too horrible.
Instead the war was fought via computer simulations. And, if you happened to be part of the calculation where you were deemed a casualty, you reported to a death chamber where you were painlessly vaporized.
Since war was made all nice and neat, there was no incentive to end it.
Not a trekkie, but I did hear about that episode. Didn't it end when Capt Kirk got ahold of the big ship (Enterprise?) and they said, release them or you will find out what real war is?
Cam- Go thru a good SOUTHERN STYLE divorce aand you'll UNDERSTAND[}:)]
Now, in the South, even after a divorce, she is STILL your sister, right? [:D]
I don't understand this phrase.
You never met my first ex-wife.
You'd understand.
quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
Rules of war are silly. War should be made as disgusting and horrendous as possible, because, in the end, that's what it is.
If war were its true, ugly self, people would be a lot less interested in waging it.
There was a Star Trek episode where a war had gone on for a few thousand years. The rules of war were such that no bombs were used, no bullets were shot, no soldiers ever took to the fields. No one was maimed, no buildings were destroyed, and there was no risk. Why? Because it was too horrible.
Instead the war was fought via computer simulations. And, if you happened to be part of the calculation where you were deemed a casualty, you reported to a death chamber where you were painlessly vaporized.
Since war was made all nice and neat, there was no incentive to end it.
Not a trekkie, but I did hear about that episode. Didn't it end when Capt Kirk got ahold of the big ship (Enterprise?) and they said, release them or you will find out what real war is?
Been a long time since I saw it, but no, it ends when Kirk blew up their computer, they screamed, "What are we going to do now?" and Kirk suggested diplomacy to end the war. This was after they determined the Enterprise was part of the casualty, and the crew was ordered to transport to the disintegration chambers.
quote:Originally posted by callcameron
quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
Rules of war are silly. War should be made as disgusting and horrendous as possible, because, in the end, that's what it is.
If war were its true, ugly self, people would be a lot less interested in waging it.
There was a Star Trek episode where a war had gone on for a few thousand years. The rules of war were such that no bombs were used, no bullets were shot, no soldiers ever took to the fields. No one was maimed, no buildings were destroyed, and there was no risk. Why? Because it was too horrible.
Instead the war was fought via computer simulations. And, if you happened to be part of the calculation where you were deemed a casualty, you reported to a death chamber where you were painlessly vaporized.
Since war was made all nice and neat, there was no incentive to end it.
Not a trekkie, but I did hear about that episode. Didn't it end when Capt Kirk got ahold of the big ship (Enterprise?) and they said, release them or you will find out what real war is?
Been a long time since I saw it, but no, it ends when Kirk blew up their computer, they screamed, "What are we going to do now?" and Kirk suggested diplomacy to end the war. This was after they determined the Enterprise was part of the casualty, and the crew was ordered to transport to the disintegration chambers.
Where can I get one of those disintegration chambers? Put a sign above it that says "ACORN" and let it do it's job.