 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Solomyr
|
 |
Seattle
Oct 2001 time: 21:22
|
|
thinkingamer,
about Jews being mostly "white", that's pretty much an american an European sterotype. admittitly, that sterotype exists for a good reason, most of the famous Jews people have heard of are from the US or Europe. but a huge percentage of the Jewish world has always lived around the mediterrainian, north africa, what is now israel, and the rest of the middle east. you don't hear about them, becasue like the rest of the Arab world they were living in, there has been very little progress scientific, philosophical, or political progress in the last 400 years.
i agree that an Israeli civ isn't the best way to represent the Jews in Civ 3. the personlly, i think the expansion civ should have been called the Jews, but that was voted down, so it was called the Hebrews. and the scientific, cultrual, political , and theological contributions of Jews throughout histroy should not be scoffed at.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kingof the Apes
|
 |
Call me KOTA
Feb 2002 time: 21:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by XarXo
*cough* *cough* *cough* *cough* 
What? I have to remember that actually hebrews aren't christians and looking what is happening in the eastern mediterranean area, not very islmaic too .
Read the last discovers, seems that Jesus where influenced by TWO older religions, one is Judaism (of course), but the other stays more in a secondary plane, and which is it? Is the Aton egyptian monotheist cult.
Read the religious system that is the basis of christianism and islam, and is by far closer to Aton cult than judaism (but but but... The ceremonial system is totally judaic). | Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all share the same old Testament; in fact all were known in the Ottoman empire as 'people of the book'.
All three religions are closely related, Islam and Christanity being 'spin-offs.'
AFAIK, the arabs had no problem with the jews until they moved back in in the 40's.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
thinkingamer
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Solomyr
thinkingamer,
about Jews being mostly "white", that's pretty much an american an European sterotype. admittitly, that sterotype exists for a good reason, most of the famous Jews people have heard of are from the US or Europe. but a huge percentage of the Jewish world has always lived around the mediterrainian, north africa, what is now israel, and the rest of the middle east. you don't hear about them, becasue like the rest of the Arab world they were living in, there has been very little progress scientific, philosophical, or political progress in the last 400 years. |
Hmmm... im sorry about the "most of them lived in Europe" part, but weren't Jews also a minority in mediterrainian, north africa, what is now israel?
Im not sure, but if that is true then there shouldn't be an Israel Civ, but every European civ AND mediterrainian, north africa, what is now israel should have a certain percentage of Jewish population.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero
|
 |
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002 time: 00:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GhengisFarb
I definitely support Palestinians having their own state, but I think a condition should be the elimination of terrorist activites.
|
I dunno isn't that a bit of a catch-22? They bomb cause they want their own state, we will give them if they don't bomb. Somone will have to break the loop if THAT is the case.
quote:
For those of you who get confused on the difference between Terrorism and Guerilla Warfare. Guerilla Warfare relates to atttacking enemy military and supplies. Terrorism relates to intentially murdering civilians. Occasionally a guerilla tactic or military operation will kill civillians, the question is whether or not the civillians were the intended target as war is a gruesome and dangerous business.
A suicide bomber blowing up a building on a military base is technically guerilla warfare. Driving a bus into a marine barraks is technically guerilla warfare. Blowing up a bus or convenience store is terrorism. Driving tanks into a civillian housing area and tearing it down because one person who used to live near there became a suicide bomber is terrorism.
|
True, Couldnt agree more about guerilla war and terrorism thing but ever since WW II, military and civilian personnel line has been blurred. It used to be that civilians could be considered as not involved in fighting, but modern thinking is different now. WW II introduced bombing civilian cities as tactics to demoralize, disrupt production and cease support by civilains. Civilians are vital part of warfare. In democratic nations, is for them the military is fighting and even if it is not a democratic country the citizens are the ones who are supporting the army, feeding, clothing and making bullets for them.
quote:
Flying a plane into a skyscraper to kill unsuspecting children and infants because you are too cowardly to fight the infants in hand to hand combat is DEFINITELY terroism, and in my opinion terrorists have given up all rights to humanity and civilization, should be shot, and their body left to rot in a gutter somewhere. Our civilization coddles terrorists far too much.
|
Like I said above, its sick and cruel, but it is fair game. They feel that they are at war with us. It shouldnt have been too dificult to realize our civilians were a target. It has been for a decade and there were attempts. Of course we can invade them like we did... that's fair game too. Whether these things are morally right is kinda hazy. But thats how the modern war game goes...
quote:
Anyway, ON TOPIC, as soon as I get the upgrades for my computer I'll finish the David Ben-Gurion leaderhead set for Israel. Someone has requested a Sadam Husein leaderset that I'm thinking of making. |
Cool~
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero
|
 |
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002 time: 00:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin
You can claim science to be monotheistic too. The search for a single theory of everything from which all other theories flow. The reason for such a belief in a single overarching principal is based on the culture of monotheistic beleifs.
Science still has many of its own reasons to believe in such a unified system though. |
actually scientists would disagree. As you said science search, religion believes (faith) what is to be true. Religion knows what is true, Science does not know, but are searching to know.
As Hawking puts it, Science can lead to either of three conclusion
1 - Physical law is unified by one universal theroy
2 - Physical law is divided by many theory that encompasses different aspects of universe.
3 - Physical law cannot be defined by science.
Scientists like to BELIEVE option 1 is the case, and they pursue option 1 to be true, So you are right in a sense, but I don't think a muslim would say, "Well there is only one Allah, but there is a case that there maybe many allahs or no allah but buddah"
Also, Science is still not unified yet, The 'perfect wedding' of relativy and quantum mech. does not exist yet. We may find the answers (possibly in string), but for now you could say we are polytheistic 
So its still abit different from religion.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dauphin
|
 |
Caught in a tuna net
Jan 1970 time: 05:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Calc II
Scientists like to BELIEVE option 1 is the case, and they pursue option 1 to be true, So you are right in a sense, but I don't think a muslim would say, "Well there is only one Allah, but there is a case that there maybe many allahs or no allah but buddah"
Also, Science is still not unified yet, The 'perfect wedding' of relativy and quantum mech. does not exist yet. We may find the answers (possibly in string), but for now you could say we are polytheistic 
So its still abit different from religion. |
The point remains that most scientists believe that there is probably a single root law that is as yet unknown. And I am saying that that is as much to do with monotheistic culture as it is to do with scientific reasoning.
If we lived in a society where polytheism was more prevalent than monotheism, our science would reflect that, by prefering to believe in option 2.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Solomyr
|
 |
Seattle
Oct 2001 time: 21:22
|
|
thinkingamer-
no worries about the "mostly white" thing. indeed, the Jews were a minority throuhout histroy every place they lived, exception being anceint and modern israel and Hollywood just kidding
Calc II-
it IS the case that the palestinians want their own state, and WILL have it when they stop bombing. the olso process wasn't the grestest, but it was a hell of a lot better than what they have now. many, many people in the Pro-Israel communities in the US completely sympathis with the palestinians and there hopes and desire for self determination. but there is no way that is going to happen if they want self determination at the price of Israel's safety. Why is Israel the only contry in the world that has to defend its right to exist. no one questions the right of China or Morroco to exist, why does Israel get questioned?
and one last thing. the Bible, well, i'm not sure which we are talking about. Palestine is a Roman bastardization of Phillistine. After the Jews revolted the thrid and final time and Jerusalem was crushed in 70 CE (AD), the romans renamed Judea to Palestine to servre jewish connection with the land. they, like Hilter 2000 years later, have failed 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Cidifer
|
|
Didn't bible talk about palestinians having a grand kingdom before they God decided to chase them away and make rom for his chosen people?
quote: Didn't bible talk about palestinians having a grand kingdom before they God decided to chase them away and make rom for his chosen people? |
1st of all I don't know what that had to do with what I said, 2nd of all I really don't want to get into an arguement over what the bible says, and personally I don't read the bible so I don't know too mcuh specifics on it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Kingof the Apes
|
 |
Call me KOTA
Feb 2002 time: 21:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by gsmoove23
Was Hiroshima acceptable collateral damage? |
Well, In WW2 it was common practice to bomb large cities, on both sides. They wanted the colateral damage, less people making bombs to do the same thing to them. And there wasn't a huge public outcry either. If you have ever played games such as Warcraft or Starcraft, you know that the best way to win is to cripple their infrastructue (peons or SCVs) It's the same way in Civ. What would you do, run five bombers over a city and then attack, or just attack?
Hiroshima was acceptable, it ended the war quickly, saving huge numbers of Japanese and Allied lives that would have been lost in an assault on Japan. It also showed the world the power of nukes, which has in effect prevented anyone from using them. Imagine if we had not nuked Hiroshima, but after the war had war with Russia, and first used nukes there? Mass destruction everywhere.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|