Staredit Network

Explain on Microsoft.

Last time I heard they make the Xbox and Xbox 360. Yes they hate the public and want to dominate them...

Windows is awefull. And yet microsoft still makes lots of money off it.
Even with there god awefull internet explorer stuck in it. And all the security holes.

Heck, the only reason not to use Linux is that it's hard to run games on it.. once games work good on Linux then it will be perfect. But chances are microsoft will still keep making money due to there evil monopoly!

I'm on hiatus in case you people are wondering where I've run off to. I'll definatly be back by next weekend, after mid terms and everything.

@TheDaddy
Check the wikipedia article for yourself. As I said it might include some military deaths, because the categorization is imperfect, however the article doesn't include anywhere close to 2000 deaths.
I can't give you the exact number right now, becuase it would involve time spent studying the data that I don't have now, but I anaylzed the statistics and found for myself that there was spike of civilian deaths caused by terrorism after the wars on afganistan and Iraq.
If you want more details or if you want to work on a real rebuttal then you should analyze the data for yourself and draw your own conclusions from it.

I'm replying to him because it requires the least thinking, and it really annoys me when people try to deny statistics without looking at them.

Debating anarchy is harder, becuase it's really easy for misconceptions to be raised. I'll have a well thought out response in a week or two. In the meantime you guys are free to duke it out, but I'm moitoring this topic, so if anyone supposablly on the anarchy side says something really bloody stupid (which they won't, right...) then I'm locking this topic until I have a response prepared.

*m.r.bob signs out

Mr. Bob, since you stated the death tolls, which I accept and do not deny.

Can I assume that those deaths are all American civilian deaths? There has not been another terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. I would think that is a good job defending our country...



Do you realize windows is made not just for gamers.....

Theres whole other markets besides gamers. Just becuase a program isn't made for the highest quality of gaming does not label the company corrupt/evil.

We might have deafened our country (I would disagree becuase of the deaths of American soldiers and the kidnapping abroad), but it's at the expense of the rest of the world.
Don't you care about the well being of non Americans.

@Capitalism: Capitalism is in no way related to anarchy, the two can coexist peacefully.
@Microsoft: Microsoft could exist in an anarchy as well, however they would have a harder time because they're lawyers wouldn't have the power to abuse other companies. They could still make money as long as they continued cranking out quality OSs (although making the next version of windows really hard to pirate would probably be a good idea).
@Iraq: This is irrelevant because:
a. Read the update I mention above. I refuse to quote myself on that matter yet again.
b. Exon-Mobil recently reported the highest profits of any corporation in history. Sounds like the Iraq war benefited them after all.

ADDITION:
Reread your response.

Did you just say that soldiers are in Iraq to prevent a nuclear attack on America?
ROFL!!!

I we invaded Iraq for oil in my first post. Later I went back on this and said that we invaded Iraq because of corporate interests, and whether or not it was for oil was irrelevant.

Did you even read the update thing...


Umm, how can you possibly argue that terrorists have the means for a nuclear attack. Further more, how can you possibly argue that said terrorists are in Iraq, and the best method of defeating them is to invade and bomb said country.

As I demonstrated above Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism. Invading Iraq actually caused terrorism to go UP.

Next your going to start telling me that Saddam was connected to 9/11.

It caused terrorism to go up, well of course it did.

Its like your houses is near a bee hive. Some times you get stung, some times you don't. You kill many bees, but you get stung a lot in the proccess. You must strike the very root of the bee problem, the hive. If you attack the hive, thousands of bees will pop out to attack you.

Same logic.

Terrorist pose a nuclear threat becuase of one word. Money.

They got a lot of dinero, and if a crazy country (Iran or North Korea) decides to get rid of their nurclear arms but means of selling them to terrorists (which they can/have done). That is the threat.

And do you deny the possibility that Exon's profites were becuase of Katrina? Or becuase Exon is now drilling in Libya? Those are plausible reasons for profite.

Umm, defense contractors, duh...

(editing with more)

Yes, my mercenary friends

Do you know that they don't need Iraq? Their area of operations have been south America and Locally and Europe. I think I already explained a few posts back what my friend is making.

You make several assumptions here. First you assume that terrorists have this kind of money. I don't think they do, and I don't think they ever could.

I never said I was against the war on terrorism, I just believe that the war on Iraq is distinct from the war on terror.
I challenge you to present credible evidence that the Iraqi regime was assisting terrorists.
I can understand invading Iran, because they actually do have weapons of mass destruction, but Iraq didn't, therefore you point is irrelevant.

ADDITION:

You can't deny that they haven't made a killing from Iraq though. Defense contractors make tons of money whenever the US goes to war.

ADDITION:
By defense contractors, I mean the corporations that manufacture bombs and such, not mercenaries.

ADDITION:

That's not where most of them were or are.
Invading and bombing Iraq is a highly ineffective method of fighting terrorism. It distracts US troops who need to keep the peace. It puts undo focus on Saddam's regime. It distracts troops by having them fight freedom fighters who hate America who just don't want to see Iraq fall under American control, as well as functionalists who just want a chunk of the power they think is up for grabs.
Neither of these parties are terrorists, fighting them instead of Al-Qaeda hinders our ability to combat terrorism.

ADDITION:
Nice metaphor, but it doesn't work in this case.
The root cause of terrorism is American imperialism (such as how they treated afghanistan during the cold war). If Americans furthers terrorists perception of them as imperialists by invading middle eastern countries (proof in their eyes that Americans just do destroy the Muslim religion), then this will lead to more people in the mid east becoming terrorists.

Your problem is that you were looking at what was creating the bees instead of what was creating the bee hives.

In the factual book, "They Just Don't Get It" - David Hunt (Army ret.) he outlines pretty much everything there is to know about terrorists. How they are FUNDED, and even an al quada training manuel we discovered in Aphganistan.

Its a good read, you should read it


mmm I never said anything about Iraq


mmm again where did I say Iraq?

Do that again and I'm reporting you for flaming. That didn't contribute to the debate in any way. That was speculative, and insulting (sorry ), but it was also not meant to be taken seriously. I'll try to avoid doing stuff like that in the future.
You can help prevent further speculative insults by toning down the flaming and developing your points more.
TheDaddy0420 could teach you something about honor.

Thats a pretty bold statement. Don't you mean Russia(USSR then)?
We did fund Aphganis to stop the Soviets.

American Imperialism was primarily (if not all) Central America, Asian Islands.

I'm mixing the points of you and the other guy. Hold on a sec and I'll correct that.

@I didn't say anything bout iraq:
I thought you were trying to say that we invaded Iraq, because Saddam was providing fiscal aid to terrorists and sellings stuff to them.
You said that people supplying terrorists was bad. I agree. I also though you were using this to justify the invasion of Iraq.

ADDITION:
Ok, then consider it done.

In a way yes. By being in Iraq we are:

Bring the terrorists into a trap (death)
Occuping the terrorist's time (so they can't purchase a nuke)

Iraq can be seen like a black hole, sucking all the terrorists in the region to itself.

Oh, you were just outlining why terrorists were so dangerous so you could make that point.

It's impossible to argue against that point until we see if terrorism actually does go down after the war is over.

My theory: In Iraq we fight faux terrorists, who are really either freedom fighters or factionalists. It's really the US that's being distracted.
The US being distracted makes it easier for terrorists to purchase a nuke.

Your theory: In Iraq we fight terrorists who are invigorated by the USs injustice there and travel to the region to seek glory. Terrorists are forced to retreat into their home country as we bomb their camps.

Both are likely, both are probably true, the net loss or net gain is hard to demonstrate until after all this is over.

HOWEVER, I don't think that this is why we invaded Iraq in the first place.
There are plenty of other countries that act as the home bases for terrorists. some that are worse then Iraq.

This means that the only reason we could have chosen Iraq over these other countries, would be because of corporate interests.

Please pay special attention to the bolded segment.

This means that the only reason we could have chosen Iraq over these other countries, would be because of liberation interests.

Microsoft DOESN'T make good OSs =/

The only reason to use Windows instead of Linux is that it's harder to game on Linux

Also, Windows Vista is definantly not hard to pirate.. the only reason I don't allready have the beta running is that I don't have a DVD-drive to burn the image on LOL

ADDITION:

No.. because of OIL