Jump to content

Welcome to The OFFICIAL Pure Pwnage forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Internet ‘in Running’ For Nobel Peace Prize

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1
Fin

Fin
  • Members
  • 1,347 posts
QUOTE
‘The internet’ is in the running for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize.

The BBC reports that ‘the internet’ is among a record 237 individuals and organizations nominated, up from even last year’s all-time high of 205.

Read More http://www.wired.com.../#ixzz0iDUSvT06




(from the video) "Contact has always been the most effective antidote against hatred and conflict".
How about Stormfront and countless other "We dont like yer kind around here..." sites?

Soon MTV awards will be more prestigious then Nobel peace price.

#2
Hellswarm

Hellswarm
  • Members
  • 2,554 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:CSS
Lol, is this the same BBC that is backing the Internet becoming a fundimental human right?

You know, along with clean water and freedom of expression and all?

#3
Dark.Matter

Dark.Matter
  • Members
  • 1,662 posts
  • Rofl-Rupees:3
But Al Gore already won a nobel prize.
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Apr 23 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This thread delivers.

#4
Jimmy Rabbitte

Jimmy Rabbitte
  • GA Private
  • 1,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Steam ID:100sph
  • Gamer Army ID:3335
  • Company:Delta
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Mar 14 2010, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But Al Gore already won a nobel prize.

I lol'd very quietly in my head
The Blackman is God

#5
Dohregard

Dohregard

    Master Dohbator

  • GA Private
  • -32,927 posts
  • xfire:dohreguard
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City, KS
  • Steam ID:dohreguard
  • Xbox / GFWL:Dohregard
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Wii:209737188728753
  • Rofl-Rupees:5
  • Gamer Army ID:3070
  • Company:Foxtrot
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Mar 14 2010, 11:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But Al Gore already won a nobel prize.



QUOTE (Jimmy Rabbitte @ Mar 14 2010, 11:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I lol'd very quietly in my head



#6
Giluc

Giluc
  • GA Private
  • 410 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denmark
  • Interests:Consoles lol
  • Steam ID:Giluc
  • Xbox / GFWL:GilucZ
  • Wii:4205091662810049
  • Rofl-Rupees:1
  • Gamer Army ID:4128
  • Company:Eta
The internet should win every prize.


I LIKE
CHOCOLATE MILK

#7
Dirge

Dirge

    Best Returning Member '09

  • GA Private
  • 6,101 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Steam ID:Silent_Dirge
  • Gamer Army ID:3524
  • Company:Alpha
Wasn't the Internet orignally intended for military purposes? Pretty soon Nuclear Warheads will be there "Oh they averted the russians from attacking us"

<_<


#8
Dohregard

Dohregard

    Master Dohbator

  • GA Private
  • -32,927 posts
  • xfire:dohreguard
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kansas City, KS
  • Steam ID:dohreguard
  • Xbox / GFWL:Dohregard
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Wii:209737188728753
  • Rofl-Rupees:5
  • Gamer Army ID:3070
  • Company:Foxtrot
QUOTE (Dirge @ Mar 15 2010, 07:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wasn't the Internet orignally intended for military purposes? Pretty soon Nuclear Warheads will be there "Oh they averted the russians from attacking us"

<_<



you isn't a US amurican, git your canaduh sheet out mah freedum!

#9
Dark.Matter

Dark.Matter
  • Members
  • 1,662 posts
  • Rofl-Rupees:3
QUOTE (Dirge @ Mar 15 2010, 08:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wasn't the Internet orignally intended for military purposes? Pretty soon Nuclear Warheads will be there "Oh they averted the russians from attacking us"

<_<

Well actually, thus far, nuclear weapons have saved more lives than they have ended.

/devil's advocate
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Apr 23 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This thread delivers.

#10
Dirge

Dirge

    Best Returning Member '09

  • GA Private
  • 6,101 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Steam ID:Silent_Dirge
  • Gamer Army ID:3524
  • Company:Alpha
Pretty silly idea, isnt it?

QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Mar 15 2010, 06:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well actually, thus far, nuclear weapons have saved more lives than they have ended.

/devil's advocate

thats pretty funny, I think ill use that sometime icon_razz.gif


#11
Dark.Matter

Dark.Matter
  • Members
  • 1,662 posts
  • Rofl-Rupees:3
QUOTE (Dirge @ Mar 15 2010, 09:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
thats pretty funny, I think ill use that sometime icon_razz.gif

You disagree?

QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Apr 23 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This thread delivers.

#12
BaneTheBastard

BaneTheBastard

    Best Forum Fad/Game

  • Members
  • 977 posts
  • xfire:BaneTheBastard
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LR, Arkansas
  • Interests:History, Writing, Poker, Polls, and Gaming.
QUOTE (Dirge @ Mar 15 2010, 08:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Pretty silly idea, isnt it?


thats pretty funny, I think ill use that sometime icon_razz.gif

Without the concept of mutually assured destruction, the US and Russia would have prob gone to war after WWII, resulting in the deaths of millions.

To this date only two nuclear weapons have killed anyone, both dropped on Japan, resulting in around 180k if I remember correctly.

So yes, nuclear weapons have saved the world from large scale wars (so far).

#13
PTrain

PTrain
  • Members
  • 1,267 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:PA
  • Steam ID:ptrain
  • Xbox / GFWL:aaahhXBOXlive
And in addition the bomb helped end a war which was projected to have death tolls in the millions.


#14
Dark.Matter

Dark.Matter
  • Members
  • 1,662 posts
  • Rofl-Rupees:3
QUOTE (BaneTheBastard @ Mar 16 2010, 12:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Without the concept of mutually assured destruction, the US and Russia would have prob gone to war after WWII, resulting in the deaths of millions.

To this date only two nuclear weapons have killed anyone, both dropped on Japan, resulting in around 180k if I remember correctly.

So yes, nuclear weapons have saved the world from large scale wars (so far).

Also the millions of soldiers and civilians that would have died in the full scale invasion of Japan had they not surrendered(due to the US's nuclear capability).


Lives ended by nuclear weapons: <200k
Lives saved by nuclear weapons: oodles and oodles


as you can see, they have saved several oodles more lives than they have ended.
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Apr 23 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This thread delivers.

#15
BaneTheBastard

BaneTheBastard

    Best Forum Fad/Game

  • Members
  • 977 posts
  • xfire:BaneTheBastard
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LR, Arkansas
  • Interests:History, Writing, Poker, Polls, and Gaming.
QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Mar 16 2010, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also the millions of soldiers and civilians that would have died in the full scale invasion of Japan had they not surrendered(due to the US's nuclear capability).


Lives ended by nuclear weapons: <200k
Lives saved by nuclear weapons: oodles and oodles


as you can see, they have saved several oodles more lives than they have ended.


Sadly, that is a common misconception taught by elementary teachers. Pretty much all doctors in history agree that the Japanese would have surrendered before either drop. The fact is the US wanted diplomatic leverage over Russia for post war talks.

Tokyo was burned to the ground from firebombs (600,000 dead) before an atomic bomb was dropped. The dropsites from the bomb were chosen because they were relatively undamaged from the war, therefore the US could test the bomb's full destruction.

Japan had offered to surrender every thing as long as the emperor remained a leader in name. We declined then bombed them twice, then accepted.

Still, as I posted earlier, MAD has so far prevented a world war III, and now all we have to worry about is terrorists stealing a bomb.


#16
Dirge

Dirge

    Best Returning Member '09

  • GA Private
  • 6,101 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Steam ID:Silent_Dirge
  • Gamer Army ID:3524
  • Company:Alpha
yay! Banes back!


#17
rugmonkey

rugmonkey
  • Members
  • 1,696 posts
  • xfire:rugmonkey
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK
QUOTE (BaneTheBastard @ Mar 16 2010, 05:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
now all we have to worry about is terrorists stealing a bomb.


This pretty much. We are so screwed if this happens.
Rugmonkey
Crap IT HR
We are the all singing, all dancing crap of the world.
"Starcraft is one of man's greatest inventions. It's somewhere between penicillin and the flushing toilet"-Tasteless

#18
Dirge

Dirge

    Best Returning Member '09

  • GA Private
  • 6,101 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Steam ID:Silent_Dirge
  • Gamer Army ID:3524
  • Company:Alpha
QUOTE (rugmonkey @ Mar 16 2010, 04:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This pretty much. We are so screwed if this happens.

I wouldnt worry about terrorists stealing a bomb, as I would worry about them purchasing one legally.


#19
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,512 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
QUOTE (BaneTheBastard @ Mar 16 2010, 05:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Sadly, that is a common misconception taught by elementary teachers. Pretty much all doctors in history agree that the Japanese would have surrendered before either drop. The fact is the US wanted diplomatic leverage over Russia for post war talks.

Tokyo was burned to the ground from firebombs (600,000 dead) before an atomic bomb was dropped. The dropsites from the bomb were chosen because they were relatively undamaged from the war, therefore the US could test the bomb's full destruction.

Japan had offered to surrender every thing as long as the emperor remained a leader in name. We declined then bombed them twice, then accepted.

Still, as I posted earlier, MAD has so far prevented a world war III, and now all we have to worry about is terrorists stealing a bomb.


My history on the Pacific theatre isn't brilliant. Is this true? Source please.



#20
Dark.Matter

Dark.Matter
  • Members
  • 1,662 posts
  • Rofl-Rupees:3
QUOTE (Master C @ Mar 16 2010, 12:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My history on the Pacific theatre isn't brilliant. Is this true? Source please.

Only half true. The Japanese refused the surrender proposed by the Allies before the first bomb was dropped. They wanted terms that allowed them to keep a lot of the territory they conquered, as well as keep their military intact. Allies wouldn't take anything less than unconditional surrender, so they dropped the bomb.


QUOTE (BaneTheBastard @ Mar 16 2010, 01:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Tokyo was burned to the ground from firebombs (600,000 dead) before an atomic bomb was dropped. The dropsites from the bomb were chosen because they were relatively undamaged from the war, therefore the US could test the bomb's full destruction.

You are really a school teacher? Both Nagasaki and Hiroshima were important industrial cities to the war effort. Nagasaki was one of the most vital Japanese ports, and a lot of their naval production happened there. They didn't bomb Tokyo partly because they didn't want to destroy the palace or kill the emperor; which would probably only have pissed off the Japanese even more and strengthened their will to fight.

Edited by Dark.Matter, 16 March 2010 - 02:49 PM.

QUOTE (Dark.Matter @ Apr 23 2009, 02:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This thread delivers.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users