CENSORSHIP

[Hathradic States]

That, during times of national strife, the State should use it in order to secure unity in the nation, and avoid division.

Like censoring articles against the war, amirite?

Against the war, against the leadership, against the military. Unity is the key to victory (numbers and tech help. A lot)

[The Parkus Empire]

Like censoring articles against the war, amirite?

Against the war, against the leadership, against the military. Unity is the key to victory (numbers and tech help. A lot)

But what if the war is unjust bullshit (as virtually all aggressive wars are)...?

[Hathradic States]

Against the war, against the leadership, against the military. Unity is the key to victory (numbers and tech help. A lot)

But what if the war is unjust bullshit (as virtually all aggressive wars are)...?

Does it matter? The welfare of the State depends upon winning the war, therefor supporting the war is akin to supporting the State, and vice-versa.

[The Parkus Empire]

Does it matter?

Yes, immensely.

The welfare of the State depends upon winning the war, therefor supporting the war is akin to supporting the State, and vice-versa.

The welfare of the state would likely be better served by ending the unjust war ASAP, as wars costs shitloads of money and lives.

[Hathradic States]

Does it matter?

Yes, immensely.

The welfare of the State depends upon winning the war, therefor supporting the war is akin to supporting the State, and vice-versa.

The welfare of the state would likely be better served by ending the unjust war ASAP, as wars costs shitloads of money and lives.

If, for some reason, the State got itself involved in the war, then the only way to handle it is the finish it properly. Anything short of total victory is a disgrace.

[Norstal]

That, during times of national strife, the State should use it in order to secure unity in the nation, and avoid division.

Like censoring articles against the war, amirite?

And declassified after the war...

[Kalibarr]

________The Cake __________________Is__________A Lie____________

Seriously though, I'm against censorship except for true national security reasons, and by that I mean people would die if the information came out, not "hey, this isn't good press for the war"

I'm also against historical censorship, or censorship based upon religious reasons/morality

[Khanatah]

██ ███████ █████ ██ no ██████ ██ further. ████ █ ████ questions ███ ██████ ██

FUCK CENSORSHIP!

[The Parkus Empire]

If, for some reason, the State got itself involved in the war, then the only way to handle it is the finish it properly. Anything short of total victory is a disgrace.

I'm not sure why some fat politicians feeling "disgraced" is worse than massive tax hikes and thousands to millions of innocent people being killed and mutilated.

[Hathradic States]

If, for some reason, the State got itself involved in the war, then the only way to handle it is the finish it properly. Anything short of total victory is a disgrace.

I'm not sure why some fat politicians feeling "disgraced" is worse than massive tax hikes and thousands to millions of innocent people being killed and mutilated.

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

[Khanatah]

But what if the war is unjust bullshit (as virtually all aggressive wars are)...?

Does it matter? The welfare of the State depends upon winning the war, therefor supporting the war is akin to supporting the State, and vice-versa.

How about... screw the state?

And furthermore, screw baseless loyalty, and even further more, screw bourgeois leaders who send off the proletariat to fight against other bourgeois leaders' proletarian-filled armies.

Down with the State!

[The Parkus Empire]

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

I find my government fighting chickenshit wars and killing people for no good reason to be far, far, far more disgraceful than stopping them. But hey, I guess my priorities are messed up. It's like rape: it's disgraceful not to finish.

[Lilistrea]

I'm not sure why some fat politicians feeling "disgraced" is worse than massive tax hikes and thousands to millions of innocent people being killed and mutilated.

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

Do people on this forum role-play having extreme political views or do they just feel more badass saying things like this?

Seriously, I'm new around here and I'm curious. It seems having moderate views puts you in the minority on this board.

[Exemplis]

[The Parkus Empire]

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

Do people on this forum role-play having extreme political views or do they just feel more badass saying things like this?

Seriously, I'm new around here and I'm curious. It seems having moderate views puts you in the minority on this board.

He is a fascist--what do you expect?

[Hathradic States]

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

Do people on this forum role-play having extreme political views or do they just feel more badass saying things like this?

Seriously, I'm new around here and I'm curious. It seems having moderate views puts you in the minority on this board.

No, I actually believe 90% of what I am saying.

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

I find my government fighting chickenshit wars and killing people for no good reason to be far, far, far more disgraceful than stopping them. But hey, I guess my priorities are messed up. It's like rape: it's disgraceful not to finish.

*resist so many jokes that could be made*

Is there ever a good reason to kill? After all, what is more sacred than a human life? If one can justify killing to defend, then one can also justify killing for the sake of the supremacy of the State to which you are loyal.

[Khanatah]

I'm not sure why some fat politicians feeling "disgraced" is worse than massive tax hikes and thousands to millions of innocent people being killed and mutilated.

Because I don't believe in innocent people...

...and it would be a disgrace to the nation and the people as a whole, not just the leaders.

Says WHO?

It's a disgrace to people who've drunken the leader's Flavour-Aid, surely, but rational people who can dress themselves in the morning would probably be able to take a step back and separate themselves from their leader's 'nation'.

Don't believe in innocent people? What does that even mean and what difference does that make? Every human being is a usable pawn in your policy of body-consuming attrition warfare? Why don't you go stand on a poor person's throat if you like seeing humanity suffer so much for nation and race. Or glory, or loyalty, or whatever you fascists peddle to the kids these days...

[The Parkus Empire]

*resist so many jokes that could be made*

Is there ever a good reason to kill? After all, what is more sacred than a human life? If one can justify killing to defend, then one can also justify killing for the sake of the supremacy of the State to which you are loyal.

Modern wars ruin a state, they don't help it (unless you judge the welfare of the state as something exclusive to the standard of living and the life expectancy).

Starting a war for "supremacy" is about as morally justifiable as killing the best members of competing football teams.

[Hathradic States]

*resist so many jokes that could be made*

Is there ever a good reason to kill? After all, what is more sacred than a human life? If one can justify killing to defend, then one can also justify killing for the sake of the supremacy of the State to which you are loyal.

Modern wars ruin a state, they don't help it (unless you judge the welfare of the state as something exclusive to the standard of living and the life expectancy).

Starting a war for "supremacy" is about as morally justifiable as killing the best members of competing football teams.

Oooh...that is a good idea...I never thought of doing that...maybe the Cardinals will actually win a game if that happens...

And it is a matter of how the war is conducted. If you handle it properly, then you will have sucess. If you handle it like 'Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, then you are fucked.

[The Parkus Empire]

Oooh...that is a good idea...I never thought of doing that...maybe the Cardinals will actually win a game if that happens...

And it is a matter of how the war is conducted. If you handle it properly, then you will have sucess. If you handle it like 'Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, then you are fucked.

I'm not sure how justifiable any of those wars were, and I'm not sure the government should tell me I can't call Iraq bullshit when they lied to us, possibly for their own financial gain.

I'm also not sure how those wars could be/have been conducted better, except maybe we shouldn't have bombed the shit out of civilians.

[Hathradic States]

Oooh...that is a good idea...I never thought of doing that...maybe the Cardinals will actually win a game if that happens...

And it is a matter of how the war is conducted. If you handle it properly, then you will have sucess. If you handle it like 'Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, then you are fucked.

I'm not sure how justifiable any of those wars were, and I'm not sure the government should tell me I can't call Iraq bullshit when they lied to us, possibly for their own financial gain.

I'm also not sure how those wars could be/have been conducted better, except maybe we shouldn't have bombed the shit out of civilians.

I actually agree with you on the Iraq thing. We shouldn't have invade. However, once we did, we should have done the job right.

Uh huh...not bombing population centers won us WWII...definately...

[Norstal]

I'm not sure how justifiable any of those wars were, and I'm not sure the government should tell me I can't call Iraq bullshit when they lied to us, possibly for their own financial gain.

I'm also not sure how those wars could be/have been conducted better, except maybe we shouldn't have bombed the shit out of civilians.

I actually agree with you on the Iraq thing. We shouldn't have invade. However, once we did, we should have done the job right.

Uh huh...not bombing population centers won us WWII...definately...

The bombing of Dresden wasn't totally necessary.

[Hathradic States]

I actually agree with you on the Iraq thing. We shouldn't have invade. However, once we did, we should have done the job right.

Uh huh...not bombing population centers won us WWII...definately...

The bombing of Dresden wasn't totally necessary.

We did more than bomb Dresden...(which killed our own POWs...dumbasses)

[The Parkus Empire]

I actually agree with you on the Iraq thing. We shouldn't have invade.

Censored for causing dissent.

However, once we did, we should have done the job right.

We won.

Uh huh...not bombing population centers won us WWII...definately...

Talking about the three wars you named. Comparing them to WWII is absurd, logistically speaking, particularly the ones in the Mid East.

[Hathradic States]

I actually agree with you on the Iraq thing. We shouldn't have invade.

Censored for causing dissent.

However, once we did, we should have done the job right.

We won.

Uh huh...not bombing population centers won us WWII...definately...

Talking about the three wars you named. Comparing them to WWII is absurd, logistically speaking, particularly the ones in the Mid East.

I walked right into that one...

Or have we? What defines victory?

A war is a war is a war.