Bay 12 Games Forum

Quote from: misko27 on September 03, 2012, 02:51:10 pm

Quote from: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 03, 2012, 02:35:33 pm

Quote from: Helgoland on September 03, 2012, 02:19:36 pm

Quote from: Slayerhero90 on September 03, 2012, 02:16:51 pm

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on September 03, 2012, 02:15:11 pm

Quote from: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 03, 2012, 02:00:15 pm

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on September 03, 2012, 01:59:09 pm

Quote from: Helgoland on September 03, 2012, 01:43:02 pm

I always thought we could first conquer a backwards african country, then start selling drugs and stuff while exploiting the locals.

Pros: Realistic, only needs weapons and plane tickets.
Cons: Those natives have guns too. And the UN will be angry with us, but even Assad doesn't care about that.

Quote from: miauw62 on September 03, 2012, 01:48:59 pm

We could get some agents in the UN, have them booze up all of the other UN so they never judge us.

Better idea: Conquer some country ruled by horrible dictators that the US hates, then run it well. We'll get plenty of wealth and positive PR.

Perfect!

Wait, someone agrees with me?

It's a good idea. Gives us more time to truly decide what we're gonna do to Earth, as they'll like us.

Hoooray, slightly more realism!
So what country do we pick? I'd say someplace in the Congo - massacres there don't even get into the western news, much less on the front page.

What about Somalia?  It is total anarchy there, and if we establish an agreeable government that curbs the pirates in the area, we would be on good standing with the west.

Somalia was recently invaded by the african union, so no.

And of course, we would probably need a smaller country.  Rowanda?  Uganda?  Congo (not democratic republic)?

How about a small part of the DR Congo? Somewhere in the interior, with access to a major river for easy transport.

Dwarf Fortress: The answer is 42. The question is "Into how many parts can a goblin be processed?"

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on September 03, 2012, 02:15:11 pm

Quote from: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 03, 2012, 02:00:15 pm

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on September 03, 2012, 01:59:09 pm

Quote from: Helgoland on September 03, 2012, 01:43:02 pm

I always thought we could first conquer a backwards african country, then start selling drugs and stuff while exploiting the locals.

Pros: Realistic, only needs weapons and plane tickets.
Cons: Those natives have guns too. And the UN will be angry with us, but even Assad doesn't care about that.

Quote from: miauw62 on September 03, 2012, 01:48:59 pm

We could get some agents in the UN, have them booze up all of the other UN so they never judge us.

Better idea: Conquer some country ruled by horrible dictators that the US hates, then run it well. We'll get plenty of wealth and positive PR.

Perfect!

Wait, someone agrees with me?

It's a good idea. Gives us more time to truly decide what we're gonna do to Earth, as they'll like us.

Hoooray, slightly more realism!
So what country do we pick? I'd say someplace in the Congo - massacres there don't even get into the western news, much less on the front page.

I always thought we could first conquer a backwards african country, then start selling drugs and stuff while exploiting the locals.

Pros: Realistic, only needs weapons and plane tickets.
Cons: Those natives have guns too. And the UN will be angry with us, but even Assad doesn't care about that.

If you're operating on different premises, you can only state them, without being able to evaluate them on an external scale - because there is no such scale.

Wait, put me up as ze necessary insane German scientist/mad mathematitian!

ETHICAL (Ethical Treatment of Humans In Cool and Atrocious... Lemons? Yeah, good enough. We have way too few non sequiturs around here anyway.)

I got sidetracked mid-acronym there

ETHICAL - Ethical Treatment of Humans In Cool and Atrocious Lemons

Well, there isn't really some sort of absolute objective moral code that's ewn in stone in 50 ft. letters - all moral comes from a will. If someone finds it morally objectionable to eat meat, he cannot discuss the subject with someone who finds it acceptable - simply because of the different premises.

That being said, I'm vegetarian, but all those touchy-feely anti-meat-industry people are getting on my nerves as well. Mass-breading animals just to eat them when we might as well eat something less hard to produce is making nature one's bitch of the highest class.

Humans don't adapt to their surroundings; they adapt their surroundings to them.

I know about the Khazad thing, but who else has ever gotten banned here? Even the Bay12 noodle incident (which seems to pop up a lot these days ) didn't lead to a ban...