 |
|
 |
 |
 |
Canadian Star Federation Empire Thread
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
#277
by Citizen Sirian - 2/15/2004 4:22:24 PM
| nor do I really want to discuss it with you anyway. |
|
Then you go on to discuss it some more? You've done that in each reply, Paguma. That's a terribly mixed signal, at best. You put me in a most awkward position. If I say anything, I'm to blame for continuing the topic. Yet you can continue the topic with impunity. Well, I'll take the blame one last time, then say no more.
| I will defend, until the day I die, the right of the Canadian Government to choose it's own foreign policy. We will always make our own way in the world, and it won't always agree with your country. |
|
Of course you make your own decisions. This is a straw man, attempting to change the subject, to imply that we're trying to control you or dictate to you. But we are more than mere neighbors. We are allies. This is not a civilian issue, but a matter of military security, one of the highest urgency in our view. For you not to answer the call is a serious choice. For you to declare you do not even perceive the threat is a grave statement.
| Canada was split about 55-45 against. However, Quebec (again the French love you!) was very strongly against, and if you discount that, the country was pretty much split 50-50. |
|
"If you discount that"? No idea what to say here. I'm aware of the divide in your country. Quebec only very narrowly voted to remain part of Canada. Seems uncertain as to whether they always will. Having your nation divided by language is a tough challenge.
And yet, as long as Quebec remains part of Canada, we do not treat it as a separate state. Thus when we see passionate and spirited opposition from Quebec, you must understand, to us, that's opposition from Canada.
| You do realize we're still trading with Cuba after about 40 years of an American trade embargo don't you? Just another area we don't agree. |
|
No, it's not. The Cuba issue is minor. Your relations with Cuba are your affair. The issue of NBC weapons (nuclear, bio, chem) potentially getting into the hands of terrorists is dire, now that they have shown a sophistication to be able to pull off advanced operations right here on American soil. DIRE. And that you would compare it to your relations with Cuba shows how strongly you are misunderstanding our views on Iraq and the war on terror. You are not showing us that you are taking this seriously enough. That you treat it as if it were just another minor disagreement on foreign policy is undermining our belief that you would always be there for us when things got serious.
| The anti-americanism in Canada, and I won't deny it does exist because it does, is more like a rivalry thing. There's probably some jealousy as well. It is NOT hatred! |
|
We understand that. Yet the anti-Americanism rising in other parts of the world often IS hatred, so our sensitivity to it has changed. Al Qaeda hates us so much, they declared war on us (over a decade ago). Woe to us that we did not correctly assess the threat level they posed. If we had, we'd have given them the war they insisted upon much sooner.
Why is antisemitism such a sensitive topic? Because it spawned hatreds that led down a slippery slope into genocide. Well, anti-Americanism is going down the same dark road. It's only beginning, and America is in a far different position than scattered Jewish peoples were eighty years ago. Yet the antiamericanism has spawned Al Qaeda. It is no laughing matter any more, thousands have died over it, and you would do well to keep that in mind.
In this climate, one would think our friends and brothers could contain their... what did you say? Rivalry? Jealousy? These are SERIOUS TIMES for us. Do you realize how it comes across to be pressing issues of rivalry and jealousy at this point? Get over it already. To us, it as if we've had a tiff with our little brother in recent weeks, and he's upset with us over it, but a burglar comes to our house, breaks in, kills a member of our family, and we call up our brother on the phone for help. He rushes to our aid, but during the fight (long before it is over), he gets into another tiff with us and goes home. Like, eh? Sure, maybe he has legitimate reasons to be upset with us, but do any of them rise to the level of walking away when we need him the most?
You can't have it both ways. You want to be taken seriously, to be treated as peers, to be recognized as equals. That is all understandable. Yet when the chips are down, where are you? You're sitting back telling us about your sovereign rights and blah blah, instead of being there to help with the heavy lifting.
It is not enough to chase off Al Qaeda, to let them sit back and scheme. We did that before, the last time they tried to break in (WTC 1993 bombing) and they promised to come back. We "played nice" and left them alone, but they DID come back as threatened, and this time their plan worked. We are not going to underestimate them ever again. We've got to track them down and make sure they are caught, disarmed, wiped out, make sure they can't get access to big guns and even bigger bombs, under the table. We've got to be SURE they don't have access to NBC weapons. We can't take chances with that. If we get it wrong, as we did the last time in underestimating their capability, the consequences are too damaging.
It is a great SHAME upon our nation that we did not take this enemy seriously enough, did not "connect the dots" and deal with them when we could have and should have. We will not make that mistake again. We will do everything in our power to prevent their dream of deploying biological and nuclear weapons against our civilian population.
That's where Iraq came in as the most likely source of their supply, and our insistence that we make sure, one way or another, that that threat be eliminated. We could not keep giving it more and more time, more and more talk. Time is on the side of the terrorists, who only need one success to inflict great damage. Either Saddam was going to cooperate or he was not. He made his choice, end of issue.
There are other potential sources of NBC weapons for terrorists, and you can be sure that each will be dealt with to a satisfactory resolution, one way or the other. Such weapons must be held in responsible hands, or must be secured in verifiable ways. We MUCH prefer the way Colonel Qadafi has chosen, but we will do it the Saddam way if all other options run out. IT MUST BE DONE. Therefore it will get done, regardless of who agrees or disagrees. Disagree with us on this important issue at your own risk. We will not count you among our closest friends if you are not there for us when it most matters. If you can come to understand how important this is to us, then you could be of great help in ensuring that remaining trouble spots are resolved peacefully. That is our fondest wish. You will even have ideas and capababilites we don't, and you will be able to influence us in ways that benefit us both. If we didn't need your help, we would not ask for it. You say you are jealous and resentful, but when we call on you to take your rightful place in these important matters, you pass up the opportunity.
The shame we feel in not taking the terrorist threat seriously enough now colors our perceptions of you, in that we don't see you taking it seriously enough even now. The anger we feel with ourselves over OUR FAILURE to take this seriously is difficult to contain. We agonize over it. We are bitterly upset at ourselves, and growling at everybody else who doesn't get it yet. You may think it is not your problem, but it is such a grave threat to us, it can't help but affect you.
- Sirian
         
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sometimes too laid back. It's hard to imagine any issue that we can all get excited |
|
uSE dA lINK
 Link 
     
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#293
by Citizen damoose - 2/17/2004 7:18:10 AM
Actually I was playing a 1.19 game last night, all night. Maso, large, mil victory condition only. (Hey gotta go for the points right?  ) Now this is getting interesting as I saw some things I've never seen before...
First off, no CTD as have been reported in other threads. Second, loading and saving 1.19 games works just fine for me. I didn't have any 1.13 games saved, I'd already done the submits, so I don't have the save game update problems that have been reported either.
OK, now the interesting stuff...
Brad has said that 1.2 will be the same AI as AP. In other words playing 1.2 is playing AP without the extra races or new graphics engine. (Check the two GC forum links in the posts above) Given this here's where I am in my current game...
I've finished the tech tree and so have all the AI palyers. Acreans in the NE and NW corners. Altarians along the E edge of the map. It's late in the game, I own 90% of the resources and have out fitted them as Terror Star Party Palaces TSPP (TM). (Damn they move slow.) Which are sweeping around the map SW to SE to NE. There 2 minors currently alive that I'm raping for about 25,000 BCs a month total.
Now the Acreans have actually built a terror star on a resource. Never seen that before. They haven't moved it but it's there. I'm going to see if I can buy it. And buying SBs from the AI is expensive 9-12 thousand BCs each depending on the tech/tg you include. The other thing is AI SBs. Probably 30 between the 2 Majors and constructors all over the map. When I first saw the constructors on the mini map I thought I'd gotten the 'Die Humans!' corvette event.  Lotta good that would have done them.
Anyway the AI is building SBs like crazy with culture modules. Sometime 3 or 4 per sector and I've only seen 30% culture enhancement each, but I haven't looked at every SB. Usually in sectors they own but also in my sectors. Makes it hard to flip them is the usual manner. I actually have to move the TSPP (TM) through the sector to get 'em to flip.
Bottom line it's taking way longer than usual to culture flip the AIs for the win. And now I'm going to have to build PPs for the minors just to keep them around long enough to pay out the trade BCs thay own me.
The AI still reacts to PP SBs in one of thier sectors but not to TSPP (TM) built on a resource.  I don't know if creating a regular TSPP (TM) and running thorugh the sector will make them react. Guess I'll have to try that.
Well... off to keep the minors alive. I need the cash.
[Message Edited]
    
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Paquma. I'm coming up behind ya!
 
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
Copyright 1995-2024 Stardock Corporation. All rights reservered.
Site created by Pixtudio and Stardock, designed by Pixtudio.
|
 |
