JackC

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    2,153

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by JackC

  1. JackC
    No it's not more complicated. The SAS slotting IRA members in Boston is no different to Navy SEALS slotting Al Qaeda members in Pakistan. And if you're OK with a bit of collateral damage because people are stupid enough to allow themselves to be used as human sheilds, you'd have no objections to using Cruise missiles in either case. No thanks mate, not acceptable.
  2. JackC
    Right, but if you want to help change the "average person" into a fundamentalist USA hating terrorist whackjob, just bomb his kids. How would you react if the UK government sent the SAS into downtown Boston MA to slot a few IRA sympathisers or blow up a couple of compounds in Oregon? Does that change the way it has to be looked at?
  3. JackC
    Because we're not Muslim. They don't even like Muslims who don't believe the radical firebrand of hate that they believe in. There are some who hate the US because you're not muslim, just like there are some US citizens who hate muslims. But the average person in whatever-istan doesn't much give a shit either way, they just want to get on with their lives. But if the US drops a Cruise missile on their heads, they'll hate you for it. It's not just about being Muslim, it's also about hating the assholes who bomb you.
  4. JackC
    That depends where on the planet you are. In the US it might be 18, but in Scotland the age of independence is 16, in Japan it's 20, in most of Canada it's 19 and in some parts of Africa it's as low as 13. So your objection to Vortexring saying 16, is just as valid as his objection to you saying 18.
  5. JackC
    I have no problem with operations carried out with the cooperation of that country's security forces but Americas favoured weapon seems to be the airstrike and that quite understandably pisses people off. If someone started lobbing missiles at the US mainland, how do you think that would be recieved?
  6. JackC
    If a foreign government attacked something on American soil, you'd all be baying for blood and you know it. But it's a great idea if America does it to someone else. The hypocrisy of that is fucking disgraceful.
  7. JackC
    not at all, most of what i have read from you says very very little If I haven't said anything, why are you so mad at me?
  8. JackC
    Yes i do want to, so now STFU Friendly chap ain't ya. you lied You're upset. Was it something I said?
  9. JackC
    Yes i do want to, so now STFU Friendly chap ain't ya.
  10. JackC
    With your definition, absolutely everything is based on faith. You have faith that your eyes do not decieve you, that your observations are accurate, that you are actually on a planet called earth and not a brain in a jar connected to the matrix. Your definition is self-consistent but only because it is so wide that it encompasses absolutely everything, and for that reason it is quite useless. Science is based on the unprovable axiom that we might actually be able to know something about the universe. If that is not true, then we can know precicely nothing about anything. But we do appear to be in a universe where we can make repeatable observations. Therefore we can know something about the universe we appear to be in by using epiricism and logic. If you want to take that and call it faith, then go ahead but we won't be able to communicate further since we are not speaking the same language.
  11. JackC
    Well you don't have to. You do not need faith in science if you take the time to learn how and why it works. You never know, it might even stop some of the blatant misrepresentations and misunderstandings of science that we see in here on a regular basis. Resorting to faith is pure laziness and is fundamentally stupid. Now there's a rhetorical tautology if ever I saw one.
  12. JackC
    That depends on what you call faith. If you define faith as the acceptance of a statement as true without evidence for it, or in the face of evidence against it, then yes, I'd say that's pretty stupid.
  13. JackC
    No, there are worse presidents. Robert Mugabe for example. G.W. Bush is definitely in the running for worst American President though.
  14. JackC
    I appreciate your perspective on prayer. What is your perspective on the following ... If I'm a good son what type of asking will I do? In other words, if I am a son of God, what will I be asking for? For mercedes and porches or will I ask for God to make me like Christ? This is how JC's brother James responded to a similar question ..." You do not have, because you do not ask God. When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures." James 4: 2b-3 It seems to me that your prayers will be answered, but only if you pray for the right thing, and the right prayer is not to ask for anything.
  15. JackC
    I always wonder when someone asks me to sponsor their skydive. Should I pay them to do something that I would consider fun? Would they sponsor me to go to the pub and drink beer? Maybe I could set up some kind of rolling sponsorship deal, where people pledge $2 a month to see me hurl myself repeatedly at the floor. All profits go to charity.
  16. JackC
    A democracy is designed so that the people who live in a country have a say in how it is governed. To that end, over 18, and a law-abiding citizen is all that's required. If some "elite" branch of society then decides that certain laws be enacted, it should be up to that branch to explain their reasons for thinking this and the topic should be debated in parliament. That's all pretty much the system as it is in most democracies. The only thing I would add to all of this is that attempting to sway the vote by foul means, be it a simple willful misrepesentation of the truth (aka spin or just plain lying) or by more nefarious methods, should be a crime punishable by having "known scumbag" tattooed on their forehead and being barred from all jobs except sewer maintainance.
  17. JackC
    I couldn't find the section in the book, but this scene in the film was my favourite
  18. JackC

    Hats during sex?

    JackC replied to skymama's topic in The Bonfire

    Aww, you know I'm right.
  19. JackC
    I see you didn't get the joke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Hope_and_Glory
  20. JackC

    Hats during sex?

    JackC replied to skymama's topic in The Bonfire

    Don't think kinky, think safety. To protect your cranium from getting whacked by the ceiling fan during a mistimed leap from the exit point on top of the wardrobe.
  21. JackC
    Well, I know it's a crazy thought, but Obama is actually here.
  22. JackC
    Steady on old boy. God save the Queen and all that but do we really want those colonals back in the British Empire?
  23. JackC

    Hats during sex?

    JackC replied to skymama's topic in The Bonfire

    Frap hat? For those high-risk manoeuvres.
  24. JackC
    Fair weather Americans are funny.
  25. JackC
    And hypocritical. In this country, the wealthy are the most elite, of all the elite. And the Republicans support them in totality. Different kind of elite I'm afraid. The elite nerd will toil away in obscurity furthering scientific knowledge for a (usually government supplied) pittance because of a love for the work. To a neo-con, taking government money to do something is one small step away from taking government money to do nothing and to the neo-con, it frequently looks like the same thing. Ergo, academic research is tantamount to communism, therefore McCarthyism applies and academics may be (metaphorically) shot on sight. Now the GOP supported elite make money, so they can fund themselves and are therefore good Americans. Unfortunately, basic research is rarely profitable so the good American GOP elite frequently poach ideas from the commies in academia, but that's OK cos the commie bastards should pay their fucking dues like everyone else. No hypocracy necessary. [/tongue in cheek]