Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/27/08 02:30 PM, djconnect wrote:

At 2/27/08 08:58 AM, JayBirdSlim wrote: who you talkin to dj?

sorry i meant to quote the topic starter. but please understand I"m not trying to put him or his ideas down, its just that the world tried using imperialism once before and what the world got in return was two massive wars, one of them had the highest death rates in history for the united states. also its true that having one leader to rule the world would be more efficient. but there are to many people with different views and because you cant make every one happy there would be constant rebellion.

Hehehe...didn't mean to imply you were putting his ideas down.. just was confused as to who you were initially talking to. No big. I think the ultimate downfall to Imperialism (whether the leader is good, bad, or indifferent) is the ack of trust by those around said country. Recently, yes DJ, the ventures into Imperialism have been less than stellar and that has mostly to do with the way you have to gain the power in today's day and age in order to establish an imperial nation. In the times that were referred to originally (Rome, Egypt, Babylon etc...) there were two basic classes of people the well off and the dirt farmers. (I guess you couldcall the military a separate class) with a huge HUGE gap between them. Making it easy for someone from one class to gain control of everything.

However, in today's world, no matter what country you're talking about, the disparity between the uber class and the utter class has a bizillion levels between meaning someone has to gain control of all the classes down to the worst off. Which is why modern Imperialism can only be achieved in manners like Iraq under Saddam or North Korea etc...

who you talkin to dj?

it does seem to contradict itself don't it? hehehe

Just for arguments sake...

I think Rules of Engagement are in place to theoretically limit the extent of war's evolution. Happens all the time the most recent extreme change occured during the American Revolutionary War. Before that war for a long time soldiers lined up in long rows marching in columns and engaged one another on "designated" battlefields however the Americans (coached by the French and American indians) developed new tactics that were clearly "against" the established protocol for war by hiding and using guerilla type tactics.

I personally believe that the rules of engagement are really dictated by the evolution of the gears of war. Take for example Torture...which has beena big buzz word recently. The technology for torture haven't changed in forever...at some point, mark my words, someone will come up with a way to essentially torture someone that doesn't fall squarely in the realm of the current torture guidelines thus expanding the definition of torture and then that will evolve.

Well Imperialism (and it's modern version Dictatorship) can have it's perks that's for sure. Obviously having a single mind leading your "empire" can go very very wrong but depending upon who is in charge it can also be very efficient and beneficial to the people under its rule. I think a really good example is the rule of a later leader in Vlad Dracula in Romania. He is regarded as one of the most ruthless evil leaders of all time. However he is still reveared today in Romania and was beloved by the people he ruled. He also never really did much "expanding" of his empire. He attacked the bordering nations a fair bit but it was more of a pre-emptive thing to them invading his country.

However I think the distrust/dislike of it as a ruling government is the cons (from a hypothetical standpoint) are far greater than the pros. Same thing with an emperor, king, queen, etc... based essentially on their mood at any given time or their general disposition as people is how the empire will go at any given time.

Here is a monster version of me sneezing (due to all the pollen here in Georgia). It's part of a series of me I'm working on for my blog. Lots of cool styles going on here by the way! Very cool stuff.

It's an interesting topic to discuss. I think there comes a point in any inequality movement that the initial steps taken can actually hinder progress (I don't think black history month hinders progress..will explain in a few). As has been pointed out in many different ways thus far there comes a point where you actually have to be "equal." We're not there yet based on any number of factors, salary for equal level jobs, press treatment (for example how often do you here of a black girl that gets snatched during spring break), etc...

However Black History month in particular is a little different. Granted I took a history class so mayb it has changed (enlighten me if it has but I doubt it has) I could open my "American History" book and count the number of blacks mentioned on one hand (well the ones that don't have to do with abolition) and that is the point of Black history month not to celebrate blacks in general but to acknowledge the contributions any number made through the years that aren't recognized as "official" American history. As for why other cultures don't get a month...well...they haven't gotten to that point yet however Hispanics have been far more vocal about the lack of recognition they have gotten. Native Americans (you know the ones that were in fact here first) have fought for years (there are sadly just too few of them left to have an impact)

Anyway...that's why there is still a black history month.

My whole issue with the phrase global warming is the lack of effort to do anything about it. Whether you think it is something which is imminent or far off if you recognize that there is an issue that arises why wouldn't you be more aggressive in taking care of it? The issue of the Ozone layer depleting is what concerns me. IF it gets hot it gets hot fine... but without a protective layer from radiation there isn't a whole lot of hope for much is there? Take a gander at any planet in the solar system that doesn't have an ozone layer and how do they look? Pretty lousy.

Way cool! Very trippy tye dye like! Might be a silly question (forgive me I'm new) but does the spark mean something particular? Anyway, the texture on it is very cool...very sunshiney day

It's not bad! something I might recommend you try to do is try and recreate it from scratch without the photo! Would be a great way to learn photoshop. It doesn't appear to me that there is anything in the image that couldn't be created using standard filters and effects in Photoshop! (It's how Iearned it)

but yeah nice work! (though I do a gree with the lens flare comment about making that look realistic with the amount of light!....)