[Spiderman Fanboy] 15 and it shows

[lPeregrine]

That's just like affarmative action. That's like saying that it's ok for me to insult white people/to use an-anti white slur, because, historically, white people weren't persecuted. So, gay people deserve special treatment because of past atrocities from medieval times? No, they don't. I believe in equality, and that's why I think that the concept of affarmative action, in and of itself, is stupid.

Just keep digging that hole even deeper.

Also, you really are an idiot if you think that persecution of gay people is just something from medieval times and isn't happening right now.

I thought it was the other way around. Freeing alien slaves and saving planets from the death star and saving innocent people from an evil dictatorship was just a positive side effect of bringing balance to the force, not the other way around!!! But the prophecy was just so vague, who knows what it even means, bro?

FFS, did you even watch the movies? Remember the part where the last surviving jedi are a small and nearly irrelevant minority of the rebellion? Where the two surviving Republic-era jedi just sit around on middle of nowhere planets and do nothing, while the actual opposition to the Empire comes from non-jedi soldiers/politicians/etc? Where the only actively-fighting jedi is just another fighter pilot who doesn't even participate in the final battle?

But yeah, the rebellion was just a dispute over a minor bit of theology...

[Ahriman238]

That's just like affarmative action. That's like saying that it's ok for me to insult white people/to use an-anti white slur, because, historically, white people weren't persecuted. So, gay people deserve special treatment because of past atrocities from medieval times? No, they don't. I believe in equality, and that's why I think that the concept of affarmative action, in and of itself, is stupid.

Sure, a ladies man is a positive term. But a womanizer isn't a postive term to call a man. It has very negative connotations. But nobody would call me heterophobic if I called a board member a womanizer.

Not insulting entire swathes of the population is just common sense and good manners. I, personally, would be offended if you called me a womanizer and I had some reason to care about your opinions. You are correct in that I wouldn't assume you were insulting every straight man, but then, heterosexual males as a rule do not have to worry much about legitimate persecution. Perhaps if I were regularly harassed for my orientation I would feel differently.

In short, making people treat each other with some common fucking courtesy isn't special treatment, and the only people who think so are idiots or bigots. No one NEEDS to make you treat the majority of people decently, you do it on your own because you have some survival instincts or you don't get far, but if you need someone else to force you to behave you have to ask if the problem isn't that you're a bad person.

And you know what? I wouldn't even remark upon it, because people say stupid crap on this board all the time, myself more than most, but when we do so, we apologize. You just said you didn't mean it and told everyone to move on and that is insufficient. You need to recognize that you did, in fact, do something wrong so that you can resolve, if only to yourself, to do better in the future. Show the personal responsibility we'd demand of a six-year-old or GTFO. Either stick with or concede a single point instead of repeating yourself for pages on end. Apologize for saying something instead of wasting another two pages trying to duck responsibility for your words or accept that we will consider you a homophobe and rightfully so.

Have you guys caught on yet y/n?

y

With a side of "I will laugh in your ban thread you fallacious, goalpost-shifting, incoherent, lazy, homophobic, genocide apologist, palmfucking little troll."

[Ralin]

So, anyone else wondering if he's going to throw ninja death dust in our faces?

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Let's just forgot about me calling another user a nancy boy. I won't say that word on these boards again, I promise, but let's not get into argumenets and derail this thread with political correctness debates. OK?

[Havok]

Sure homophobe. We'll forget about it. Or wait, sorry. Sexist. Wait, which one did you mean again?

[Ahriman238]

Let's just forgot about me calling another user a nancy boy. I won't say that word on these boards again, I promise, but let's not get into argumenets and derail this thread with political correctness debates. OK?

No.

This is the fourth time you've tried to brush this off without so much as a token insincere apology. For the love of Valen, no one you know in real life would ever have to know. Can't you even anonymously man up?

Your debating tactics to date, namely repeating yourself and saying 'yuh-huh,' cherry-picking sources, refusing to engage others or even consistently defend a single point, and posting/linking to disreputable sources without even adding any insights of your own, would be considered to weaselly and low-brow for an elementary school playground argument. Now you're adding "will not take the slightest responsibility for anything said" to the list.

If you cannot hold a discussion on so much as the level of a small child, do not be surprised when the adults refuse to take you seriously. Or when we elect not to deal with your crap at all.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

When i return from my sleep tonight, tommorow will be more discussion with me!!!

[Lurks-no-More]

When i return from my sleep tonight, tommorow will be more discussion with me!!!

No, there won't be. There might be people trying to talk some sense into you, while you keep blathering on, but that's not a discussion. You're either unwilling or incapable of engaging in coherent discussion, vastly uninformed on the subject you keep on talking about, and generally immature, annoying and foolish.

[DaveJB]

Double standards. If I insulted somebody by using a hetero term, nobody would make that big of a deal about it.

There's no double standard here, we just don't like people who use prejudicial slurs. People have been banned for using anti-white insults such as "cracker," and the only reason why no-one has ever been banned for posting heterophobic slurs (and no, "womanizer" is not such a slur, because it isn't even hetero-specific; it can be used in application to a lesbian or bisexual woman and would still be valid), is because no-one on this board, to the best of my knowledge at least, has ever used such terms in the way that homophobes do.

As for the main argument, there's really no point in me continuing to argue with you; I've challenged you to prove your core assumption that "the Galactic Empire wasn't that bad of a government" on three separate occasions, and you've ignored me each time.

I'll leave you with this thought: had you truly apologised and shown contrition for your earlier statement, rather than getting angry and accusing people of double standards, odds are the admins would have gone easy on you, given your age. Bear this in mind going forward, and maybe you'll be able to avoid your current future as a gigantic, colossal fuck-up.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Anakin's redemption was about bringing him back from the darkside of the Force, even if he wasn't involved in political power.

[Thanas]

Spiderman fanboy gets a warning for misuse of debate rules.
He also gets a warning for use of homophobic slurs.
He also gets a warning for not reading the announcements, despite being effectively told to do so by a mod (me).

That makes three warnings, bringing your total tally to four. I shall look forward to your inevitable ban.

[Lord Revan]

Mind you, the idea that the 'Rebels' would justify any sort of Death Star scale atrocities (nevermind BDZ) is pretty absurd, given that I am hard pressed to remember the Alliance actually executing any genocide/planet kililng events themselves. Maybe individual factions within it did, but the Alliance itself would not condone such an action. Especially after Alderaan, as it gave them immense moral authority.

I am (or was anyway) fairly well up on the EU and the only things that spring to mind that paint the Alliance in a bad light are those ex-Alliance extremists who kidnapped Face Loran from the Wraith Squadron books as a kid. It's also explicitly mentioned that they refused to get involved with criminal groups like Black Sun.

In the EU there were civilians on the death star.

So? it's not unheard of to have civilians on military bases for certain tasks, but that doesn't make the base any less valid target.

PS:I'm sorry if this was addressed already but for certain reasons I take matters conserning the military seriously

[Spiderman Fanboy]

That's just like affarmative action. That's like saying that it's ok for me to insult white people/to use an-anti white slur, because, historically, white people weren't persecuted. So, gay people deserve special treatment because of past atrocities from medieval times? No, they don't. I believe in equality, and that's why I think that the concept of affarmative action, in and of itself, is stupid.

Sure, a ladies man is a positive term. But a womanizer isn't a postive term to call a man. It has very negative connotations. But nobody would call me heterophobic if I called a board member a womanizer.

Not insulting entire swathes of the population is just common sense and good manners. I, personally, would be offended if you called me a womanizer and I had some reason to care about your opinions. You are correct in that I wouldn't assume you were insulting every straight man, but then, heterosexual males as a rule do not have to worry much about legitimate persecution. Perhaps if I were regularly harassed for my orientation I would feel differently.

In short, making people treat each other with some common fucking courtesy isn't special treatment, and the only people who think so are idiots or bigots. No one NEEDS to make you treat the majority of people decently, you do it on your own because you have some survival instincts or you don't get far, but if you need someone else to force you to behave you have to ask if the problem isn't that you're a bad person.

And you know what? I wouldn't even remark upon it, because people say stupid crap on this board all the time, myself more than most, but when we do so, we apologize. You just said you didn't mean it and told everyone to move on and that is insufficient. You need to recognize that you did, in fact, do something wrong so that you can resolve, if only to yourself, to do better in the future. Show the personal responsibility we'd demand of a six-year-old or GTFO. Either stick with or concede a single point instead of repeating yourself for pages on end. Apologize for saying something instead of wasting another two pages trying to duck responsibility for your words or accept that we will consider you a homophobe and rightfully so.

Have you guys caught on yet y/n?

y

With a side of "I will laugh in your ban thread you fallacious, goalpost-shifting, incoherent, lazy, homophobic, genocide apologist, palmfucking little troll."

You're taking more thread space up arguing about me calling another user a nancy boy that I originally would have if I was never warned that the word was offensive. OK, fine, I'll stop using that word. You should/could have easily just send me a PM, warning me to stop using that word. And this'll be my last post discussing that. Just like with affirmative action, a specific group of people do not deserve double standards/special treatment. Everybody deserves to be treated equally/respectfully.

Treating people with common courtsey IS NOT special treatment, yes, that's correct. Except when the definition common courtsey varies from group to group-aka, double standards. Let's stop derailing this thread about this topic.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

In the EU there were civilians on the death star.[/quote]
So? it's not unheard of to have civilians on military bases for certain tasks, but that doesn't make the base any less valid target.

PS:I'm sorry if this was addressed already but for certain reasons I take matters conserning the military seriously[/quote]

Yes, but, the rebels should have at least showed concern for people that were in the wrong place at the wrong time. For example, many civilians were there on the death star because it had civilian spots on it, like quasi-malls, and stuff. The rebels should have helped them to escape. They had nothing to do with destroying planets or committing imperial atrocities.

A real world analogy would be this. In the Middle east right now, in israel vs hamas, civilians do get caught up in the fighting, but that's just because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time. And, America does whatever it can to make sure that civilians don't get involved in drone strikes.

[Metahive]

Those were civilians who knowingly worked on a massive Weapon of Mass Destruction which had already massacred an entire planet worth of people and was about to do the same to another. It was either them or the rebels. Can anyone blame the rebels who choosing themselves?

BTW, I'm not writing this for you, about to be banned troll, I'm writing this for anyone else reading this thread, so don't even bother to reply.

[Lord Revan]

When i return from my sleep tonight, tommorow will be more discussion with me!!!

there's no discussion, only you whining and we telling to shut the fuck up.

PS:sorry for that but I've wanted to say that for days but my PC died I'm this from my parents laptop.

[AniThyng]

No the correct analogy is civilian contractors on an American military base in war zone. I was not aware this therefor makes America guilty of making use of human Shields if the base falls under attack, which is what your absurd analogy implies.

What next, because every warship has medical facilities, all attacks on warships with wounded on board are war crimes?

[Lord Revan]

As Metahive said there was a time issue with the destruction of the Death Stars (both of them), sure military personel would like to avoid civilian casualities when ever it's possible, but it's not always possible and sometimes minor civilian casualities are the lesser of 2 evils especially if time is in short supply as it generally is and that's ignoring the fog of war.

[Ahriman238]

You're taking more thread space up arguing about me calling another user a nancy boy that I originally would have if I was never warned that the word was offensive. OK, fine, I'll stop using that word. You should/could have easily just send me a PM, warning me to stop using that word. And this'll be my last post discussing that. Just like with affirmative action, a specific group of people do not deserve double standards/special treatment. Everybody deserves to be treated equally/respectfully.

Treating people with common courtsey IS NOT special treatment, yes, that's correct. Except when the definition common courtsey varies from group to group-aka, double standards. Let's stop derailing this thread about this topic.

And just like that, this thread is funny again.

Do you know why I keep insisting on an apology? When adults apologize, they take responsibility for their words and deeds, express regret and a willingness to make up for it, and resolve not to do it again. I'm sure you're a very nice young man in person, but your online persona is not. Fixing that begins with taking responsibility for something, anything, you've said. Defend a point by acknowledging what people are saying, apologize when you say something offensive.

"Ok, Fine" is not what you say when you take responsibility, it's what you say to get people to leave you alone, say your mother was yelling at you to make your bed.

As for derailing the thread, YOU are the one consistently derailing the thread with incoherent babbling about "Anakin's redemption" which is inextricably linked to the DS II, how? Or comparisons to the US in WWII which relate in any way to the discussion, how?

While you ponder that, the adults will talk.

It's been a while since we've had this kind of trolling, hasn't it? We should do something special.

[Kreller1]

The Death Star was not an easy target to take down, and the Rebels did not have unlimited resources to try and wait to pop the thing when there were no civilian targets on board. It makes sense that the Rebels kill the stinking thing as soon as they get a chance because of Alderaan. Anyone who happens to be on board when it goes poof is a minor consideration compared to the population of Alderaan, plus any other planets that were next in line on Tarkin's/GE's list of trouble-makers. The Emperor could have packed the DS entirely full of children, and that still does not reduce the importance of destroying it as soon as the chance presents itself.

[DaveJB]

How would evacuating all civilians from the Death Star even work from a practical standpoint, anyway? Doing it right before Luke fired his torpedoes into the exhaust port was clearly out of the question considering the superlaser gunner's hand was literally inches away from the firing switch when the station exploded. And doing it as soon as the Death Star arrived at the gas giant Yavin? Well, I imagine a situation like this would have unfolded:

LEIA: Grand Moff Tarkin, I demand that you allow all civilians to evacuate the Death Star. We're going to destroy your station, and I don't want their deaths on my conscience.

TARKIN: Destroy the Death Star, eh? Impossible. There's no way you could even put a dent into my battlestation, to say nothing of destroying it.

LEIA: Actually, Tarkin, I think you'll find there is. There's a thermal exhaust port in one of the hemispheric trenches, and if one of our fighters were to fire a proton torpedo down it, your station will be destroyed!

TARKIN: Hah! The mere notion of something like that destroying our battlestation is...

CHIEF BAST: Um, sir? According to these design schematics I've got here, that plan would actually work.

TARKIN: Really?! In that case, General Tagge, deploy all our fighter squadrons immediately. Blanket Yavin IV's airspace, and destroy any ships which attempt to leave the moon. Admiral Motti, contact Bevel Lemelisk, and tell him to meet us at Kuat Drive Yards. Once we've destroyed the Rebel base, we'll proceed there and devise a work-around for this exhaust port problem.

LEIA: ...crap.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

The Death Star was not an easy target to take down, and the Rebels did not have unlimited resources to try and wait to pop the thing when there were no civilian targets on board. It makes sense that the Rebels kill the stinking thing as soon as they get a chance because of Alderaan. Anyone who happens to be on board when it goes poof is a minor consideration compared to the population of Alderaan, plus any other planets that were next in line on Tarkin's/GE's list of trouble-makers. The Emperor could have packed the DS entirely full of children, and that still does not reduce the importance of destroying it as soon as the chance presents itself.

They didn't have to destroy the entire death star, just the superlaser. Wedge already destroyed the superlaser in ROTJ, but Lando destroyed it compltley just to kill the imperials/civilians on it.

[Kreller1]

Nowhere is it mentioned in either film that the superlaser was the sole target, nor that they could take it out and not the rest of the station. Wedge took out the "control tower", and Lando hit the main generator, which to me means they took out the major power source of DSII, not the superlaser. Destroying the entire station was the goal both times, and makes perfect sense. If the rebels somehow managed to kill only the superlaser, there will *still* be civilian casualties, and the Empire can probably toss a new laser in the intact station within a few months, negating all the work that the Rebels would have just completed.

[Spiderman Fanboy]

Nowhere is it mentioned in either film that the superlaser was the sole target, nor that they could take it out and not the rest of the station. Wedge took out the "control tower", and Lando hit the main generator, which to me means they took out the major power source of DSII, not the superlaser. Destroying the entire station was the goal both times, and makes perfect sense. If the rebels somehow managed to kill only the superlaser, there will *still* be civilian casualties, and the Empire can probably toss a new laser in the intact station within a few months, negating all the work that the Rebels would have just completed.

WHY WOULDNT THE SUPERLASER BE THEIR SOLE TARGET? THey were trying to save planets from being blown up, right?

[Stark]

Removing the superlaser, which is like 33% of the death star, would probably cause the Death Star to collapse.

But I hear when defending yourself from unstoppable leak force you should try the riskiest, most likely to fail plan if it has a chance of reducing loss of life.