Again an interesting insight into the other side of the great lake. Talking about the video as much as this thread (which iscontaining some great examples of incredible stupidity in shocking amounds)
The Big Picture: A Guy Named Joe
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Hy Bob,
I've been watching you show from the very beginning and I love it, but I have one complaint.
In your last show you showed a picture of Vlad Tepes and called him a "dead conqueror".
Vlad Tepes was a Voievod (equivalent of a king) in the Romanian Country (part of modern day Romania). He is the historic figure that inspired the legend of Dracula.
He is a National Hero in my country and I resent you depicting his as evil.
Vlad Tepes never invaded anyone or conquered anything. He only fought of the Otoman Empires (Turks) relentless invasions in their continues efforts to conquer Europe.
He was a leader that fought for his people's independence and freedom.
He was demonofied by the Austro-Hungarian Empire because he was a thorn in their side and because he used to impale traitors and invaders on giant wooden stakes (common practice in medieval Europe).
I resent you calling him a conqueror or depicting him as evil.
Thanks
I've been watching you show from the very beginning and I love it, but I have one complaint.
In your last show you showed a picture of Vlad Tepes and called him a "dead conqueror".
Vlad Tepes was a Voievod (equivalent of a king) in the Romanian Country (part of modern day Romania). He is the historic figure that inspired the legend of Dracula.
He is a National Hero in my country and I resent you depicting his as evil.
Vlad Tepes never invaded anyone or conquered anything. He only fought of the Otoman Empires (Turks) relentless invasions in their continues efforts to conquer Europe.
He was a leader that fought for his people's independence and freedom.
He was demonofied by the Austro-Hungarian Empire because he was a thorn in their side and because he used to impale traitors and invaders on giant wooden stakes (common practice in medieval Europe).
I resent you calling him a conqueror or depicting him as evil.
Thanks
I can appreciate that, and in the future will choose my words more carefully. But disrespect was not my intent.AdrianRK said:
The character being referenced was a GI Joe enemy called "Serpentor," whose backstory involves being made from the DNA of snakes and various military/monarchial figures of ruthless reputation from history; Vlad Tepes being one of them, Napolean, Philip and Alexander of Macedon, Ivan the Terrible, Hannibal, Ghengis Kahn, Attila the Hun, Rasputin and Caesar being the others. I picked Tepes' portrait because I figured he was the guy on the list most-immediately recognizable by his face (except for Napolean, who isn't as "interesting.")
The Patriarch is dead?
Really?
The reason this generation doesn't have a G.I.Joe, is that it has a K-Mart Joe.
Your Chuck, Scott Pilgrim, Clerks, Wayne/Garth work as henchmen for the real battlefields of the day.
And selling is only half the battle.
Really?
The reason this generation doesn't have a G.I.Joe, is that it has a K-Mart Joe.
Your Chuck, Scott Pilgrim, Clerks, Wayne/Garth work as henchmen for the real battlefields of the day.
And selling is only half the battle.
This was an early one, but I can see some important issues nonetheless. If the actual issue is anti-war activists, then what could be the solution? Another world war? Even though I don't think anyone has the absolute confidence and complete disregard for life in general to use nuclear weapons, I'm not so convinced that I want to test that theory.
The thing is that when the boomers were rising into power in the 1980s, it was the birth of Political Correctness. The idea that we didn't need to have any bad guys, that everyone could work together. The USSR was to be presented as a potential group of friends and allies, as opposed to a giant enemy, and you saw this in children's media with a "get them young" attitude. Understand that while the primary enemy was fictional, groups like the Russians WERE present in the form of a USSR version of GI Joe, who despite tensions GI Joe ultimatly wound up teaming up with in most cases to fight a common enemy.
Equally fanatical and equally incorrect. There don't have to be any "enemies", but there is always a villain, a perpatrator. When there is a problem, they must be targeted first or risk horrible reprecussions after the fact. Case and point: nobody truly respects russians anymore. They didn't have much of a chance to stop being a people of evil in the public eye before the institution that was making life hell for everyone collapsed. Now we know, but nobody's quite gotten over it.
-- Germany had the nazis as a governing body. These militant groups aren't in charge, they're guerilla fighters, minority organizations within their own countries. How can you target a whole society when the society as a whole asks for help? (Afghan majority does not want foreign troops to withdraw)
-- There is currently no major political group on the planet implimenting mass extermination, and until someone with a will and a way pops up, there's absolutely no reason diplomacy can't be attempted.
-- The middle east is a collection of societies that hasn't advanced culturally the same way as the rest of the world. Even if international forces moved in, took down the government and set up an occupation force, that wouldn't magically turn them into a U.S. mirror. There would still be rebel groups (incresed in number by people not wanting to lose their freedom) and society as a whole wouldn't change. It needs time for that and right now providing a stabilizing force is the best anyone can do for that.
There is no need to rebuild society, as it hasn't yet collapsed. The future will likely see generations willing to work harder for everything and possibly a revival in agriculture in the western world (not necessarily bad things). So back on track to where?
Stop. Right now. You can't blame a philosophy for the world's problems. I could blame the recession on rampant conservatism (in a global society, stockpiling, saving and taking what you can is a terrible idea), but that just doesn't make sense. I'd like you to first define morality as you see it, then we can get a perspective on how liberalism has failed society. As for history, I don't know what you're on, but historians haven't started addling facts to suit their philosophy (in fact, even less so than in the past, as now it's become a requisite to say what all of the larger groups think).Therumancer said:
Now that paragraph could easily be turned in the opposite direction. Watch as I change a single sentence.Therumancer said:
The thing is that when the boomers were rising into power in the 1980s, it was the birth of Political Correctness. The idea that we didn't need to have any bad guys, that everyone could work together. The USSR was to be presented as a potential group of friends and allies, as opposed to a giant enemy, and you saw this in children's media with a "get them young" attitude. Understand that while the primary enemy was fictional, groups like the Russians WERE present in the form of a USSR version of GI Joe, who despite tensions GI Joe ultimatly wound up teaming up with in most cases to fight a common enemy.
Equally fanatical and equally incorrect. There don't have to be any "enemies", but there is always a villain, a perpatrator. When there is a problem, they must be targeted first or risk horrible reprecussions after the fact. Case and point: nobody truly respects russians anymore. They didn't have much of a chance to stop being a people of evil in the public eye before the institution that was making life hell for everyone collapsed. Now we know, but nobody's quite gotten over it.
There is a VERY clear difference between nazi Germany and the middle east. Several, in fact.Therumancer said:
-- Germany had the nazis as a governing body. These militant groups aren't in charge, they're guerilla fighters, minority organizations within their own countries. How can you target a whole society when the society as a whole asks for help? (Afghan majority does not want foreign troops to withdraw)
-- There is currently no major political group on the planet implimenting mass extermination, and until someone with a will and a way pops up, there's absolutely no reason diplomacy can't be attempted.
-- The middle east is a collection of societies that hasn't advanced culturally the same way as the rest of the world. Even if international forces moved in, took down the government and set up an occupation force, that wouldn't magically turn them into a U.S. mirror. There would still be rebel groups (incresed in number by people not wanting to lose their freedom) and society as a whole wouldn't change. It needs time for that and right now providing a stabilizing force is the best anyone can do for that.
Total war is a terrible idea. Today's world is a planet. The WHOLE planet. If anyone starts a war with anyone else, there will be reprecussions. A resolution of conflict is a great idea, now explain to me how total war must be initiated to end conflict. A distinct victor just means civil war or public unrest for a very long time. Example: The end of the first world war sparked tension in germany. Suddenly the common people were even poorer than before. Then came Hitler. Suddenly everyone realized that the Jews had money and they didn't (why? Nobody cared, but the Jews hadn't been allowed to own property, they had to be merchants. They also had to take that kind of crap for a very ling time beforehand. A culture constantly being pushed to the bottom prepares for the inevitable fall). Now there was a common enemy in the germans' eyes. The foreigners and the Jews. Hitler temporarily fixed the economy and used the war to cover up extermination, all because a country could unite against a common foe. Us or them, no?Therumancer said:
And now all the pieces fall into place. Remember the Xenu story? It's not worth $110,000.Therumancer said:
There is no need to rebuild society, as it hasn't yet collapsed. The future will likely see generations willing to work harder for everything and possibly a revival in agriculture in the western world (not necessarily bad things). So back on track to where?
![Fr]anc[is](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/93/93202.jpg?1620797781){kind=avatar}
wow, bob. it seems like each week you become even deeper and more socially brilliant... who knows, you could probably solve world hunger in a year or two lol
Therumancer, saddly, has the right of it 
.
The thing is Therumancer is the only person on this board with the rational to recognize the atrocities of war and in the same instance realize its place. War does exist in this fashion for a reason.
He's brought up several points that nobody has been able to logically counter - primarily why hasn't America win a war since WWII? because we didn't engage like we should have. I remember my Uncle (a coast-guard member whose done two tours in Afghanistan) told me that the head of the military quit during the Bush administration because he basically said "we need X number of troops to completely control this city; otherwise the insurgents will just bounce behind us as we go from area to area" he got declined that troop number and low and behold what he predicted happened. Instead, we hunted for targets of interest "mission accomplished" eh?
Lastly, you talk about books as if this viewpoint is ignorant, I implore you to read some books of your own. Books by generals, warriors, hell even "my war gone by I miss it so" which was by a journalist. I've read a lot of similar viewpoints to Therumancer from people who actually know war.
It's disgusting but man the **** up buttercups, it's the truth. Educate yourselves.
Edit:
One important question which I think people balk at is "why must we fight the middle eastern people?" And that's a very hard question to answer. I believe individually we can all get along; the problem is culturally we are very different. The books I've read about Middle Eastern philosophy/mythology (Arabian Nights, Quran, etc.) lead me to the conclusion that culturally we are vastly different.
A lot of the moral lessons in the stories I read from these books is that opportunistic actions that serve the self are to be divinely rewarded (By European standards). Imagine if the story of Gallahad instead of turning down the maiden he boinked her because "It was his reward for being devout" - you pretty much have Sinbad the Sailor (4th voyage I believe). Huge cultural difference mixed in with animosity towards us (see: links Therumancer posted) is a recipe for a dangerous enemy.
.The thing is Therumancer is the only person on this board with the rational to recognize the atrocities of war and in the same instance realize its place. War does exist in this fashion for a reason.
He's brought up several points that nobody has been able to logically counter - primarily why hasn't America win a war since WWII? because we didn't engage like we should have. I remember my Uncle (a coast-guard member whose done two tours in Afghanistan) told me that the head of the military quit during the Bush administration because he basically said "we need X number of troops to completely control this city; otherwise the insurgents will just bounce behind us as we go from area to area" he got declined that troop number and low and behold what he predicted happened. Instead, we hunted for targets of interest "mission accomplished" eh?
Lastly, you talk about books as if this viewpoint is ignorant, I implore you to read some books of your own. Books by generals, warriors, hell even "my war gone by I miss it so" which was by a journalist. I've read a lot of similar viewpoints to Therumancer from people who actually know war.
It's disgusting but man the **** up buttercups, it's the truth. Educate yourselves.
Edit:
One important question which I think people balk at is "why must we fight the middle eastern people?" And that's a very hard question to answer. I believe individually we can all get along; the problem is culturally we are very different. The books I've read about Middle Eastern philosophy/mythology (Arabian Nights, Quran, etc.) lead me to the conclusion that culturally we are vastly different.
A lot of the moral lessons in the stories I read from these books is that opportunistic actions that serve the self are to be divinely rewarded (By European standards). Imagine if the story of Gallahad instead of turning down the maiden he boinked her because "It was his reward for being devout" - you pretty much have Sinbad the Sailor (4th voyage I believe). Huge cultural difference mixed in with animosity towards us (see: links Therumancer posted) is a recipe for a dangerous enemy.
I would think that fake people fighting fake wars against fake threats would be a pretty accurate view of modern war.
At least as far as those directing the wars are concerned.
At least as far as those directing the wars are concerned.
That's a little nitpicky isn't it? A beehive is almost entirely female. The handful of males exist solely for procreation, and typically die shortly after doing so.snakeakaossi said:
Heh... I always personally thought GI Joe was the opposite.
Cobra was an evil organization made of larger than life versions of THEN existing caricacturized bad guys. I mean, Major Blood would have been at home in any "evil British" tank Brigade, and if Baroness wasn't the iconic depiction of "Sexy, sultry, evil NAZI", I don't know what is. The scientific mind of Destro, a man whose very face was encased in an IRON MASK for all time and yet Destro constantly floated back and forth on a moral seesaw between committing an evil act and doing what he felt was "necessary, yet misunderstood" for the betterment of the Human race (as he saw it). Cobra commander himself... well he was just a hooded representation of every faceless boogieman, the shadow behind the darkest armies, the puppet master. Where most people remember him as being comically dimwitted and foolish (thanks to Chris Latta's voice), I always found Cobra Commander chilling... behind that comic-relief, bumbling nonsense was a man who inspired enough fear and terror to not only unite those other "bad guys" in Cobra, but to run the entire operation as it's iron-fisted RULER? No no, there is something we aren't seeing there... Cobra was comprised of some of the worst scum on the planet (and some of the Best.. I mean, Zartan was stone cold, and Storm Shadow could get it done). None of them would have served someone like Cobra commander unless Cobra commander was someone they themselves feared.
So here we have this evil terrorist organization Cobra, single greatest threat to mankind there is. Who will stop them? IF such an organization truly existed, you'd need the combined might of a unified military to do it, and that is what GI JOE is.
I saw GI Joe as an opportunity to showcase the various armed forces, I mean, Bob you kinda missed the mark on that because just like your DAD's GI JOES, OUR GI JOES were pretty faithful recreations of their various sources. Low Light was a marine sniper... he came dressed AS a Marine sniper. WITH proper weapon. Doc was a black army doctor (The doctor they had before Lifeline, who came with a pistol even though he was a pacifist haha). Doc came with a STRETCHER, and was dressed as a Vietnam era Army doctor.
Sure there were a few hit and misses: Spirit, the Eagle sporting indian who served as the mystical "Western" power to balance Storm Shadow's mystical "Eastern" powers. Most people don't seem to recall that in the beginning, Storm Shadow was Spirit's nemesis, not Snake Eyes.
Later, either due to Snake Eyes (a special forces, black ops guy) increased popularity, or someone realizing that the Indian stereotype wasn't working out for the best, Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow were eventually paired off, which sparked a whole lot of nonsense and rumors (Remember, the "Snake eyes is Storm Shadows brother!" rumors filling playgrounds everywhere?)
I forgot where I was going with this...
Cobra was an evil organization made of larger than life versions of THEN existing caricacturized bad guys. I mean, Major Blood would have been at home in any "evil British" tank Brigade, and if Baroness wasn't the iconic depiction of "Sexy, sultry, evil NAZI", I don't know what is. The scientific mind of Destro, a man whose very face was encased in an IRON MASK for all time and yet Destro constantly floated back and forth on a moral seesaw between committing an evil act and doing what he felt was "necessary, yet misunderstood" for the betterment of the Human race (as he saw it). Cobra commander himself... well he was just a hooded representation of every faceless boogieman, the shadow behind the darkest armies, the puppet master. Where most people remember him as being comically dimwitted and foolish (thanks to Chris Latta's voice), I always found Cobra Commander chilling... behind that comic-relief, bumbling nonsense was a man who inspired enough fear and terror to not only unite those other "bad guys" in Cobra, but to run the entire operation as it's iron-fisted RULER? No no, there is something we aren't seeing there... Cobra was comprised of some of the worst scum on the planet (and some of the Best.. I mean, Zartan was stone cold, and Storm Shadow could get it done). None of them would have served someone like Cobra commander unless Cobra commander was someone they themselves feared.
So here we have this evil terrorist organization Cobra, single greatest threat to mankind there is. Who will stop them? IF such an organization truly existed, you'd need the combined might of a unified military to do it, and that is what GI JOE is.
I saw GI Joe as an opportunity to showcase the various armed forces, I mean, Bob you kinda missed the mark on that because just like your DAD's GI JOES, OUR GI JOES were pretty faithful recreations of their various sources. Low Light was a marine sniper... he came dressed AS a Marine sniper. WITH proper weapon. Doc was a black army doctor (The doctor they had before Lifeline, who came with a pistol even though he was a pacifist haha). Doc came with a STRETCHER, and was dressed as a Vietnam era Army doctor.
Sure there were a few hit and misses: Spirit, the Eagle sporting indian who served as the mystical "Western" power to balance Storm Shadow's mystical "Eastern" powers. Most people don't seem to recall that in the beginning, Storm Shadow was Spirit's nemesis, not Snake Eyes.
Later, either due to Snake Eyes (a special forces, black ops guy) increased popularity, or someone realizing that the Indian stereotype wasn't working out for the best, Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow were eventually paired off, which sparked a whole lot of nonsense and rumors (Remember, the "Snake eyes is Storm Shadows brother!" rumors filling playgrounds everywhere?)
I forgot where I was going with this...