Jump to content

KONY 2012


Sean_R_LFC

Recommended Posts

Me and some buddies are planning to take part in Covering The Night.

 

Our town will know of Kony, his face will be everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me and some buddies are planning to take part in Covering The Night.

 

Our town will know of Kony, his face will be everywhere.

And this will aid in his capture how exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me and some buddies are planning to take part in Covering The Night.

 

Our town will know of Kony, his face will be everywhere.

And this will aid in his capture how exactly?

Did you watch the video? Getting him a public profile is the primary aim of the campaign.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me and some buddies are planning to take part in Covering The Night.

 

Our town will know of Kony, his face will be everywhere.

And this will aid in his capture how exactly?

Did you watch the video? Getting him a public profile is the primary aim of the campaign.

Yes I did watch the video, but you have not answered my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guns N R0se
Me and some buddies are planning to take part in Covering The Night.

 

Our town will know of Kony, his face will be everywhere.

All you're going to do is piss off whoever has to clean up after you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea is that, if this guy has a place in the public conscience, they will demand that he is dealt with. If he is not, foreign support may fail to be recommissioned aat budget time, due to lack of interest. "Cover the night" aims to bring the name and face of Kony to as many people as possible, all at once. If the name is everywhere, people will ask questions, and hopefully, care about the answers they get.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this charity wants us to demand military action in another country? That doesn't sound very much like a charity.

 

Lets be realistic here, this organisation has popped up out of nowhere, has already had numerous criticisms about it yet your all willing to follow it blindly into some blood thirsty goose chase? I would love to see this man brought to justice but the timing, method and organisers are very off putting to me.

 

You have your own opinion and that's fine and I will question yours just as you can question mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The charity is a little sketchy, but the cause is not. Plus if you'd actually watched the video, and comprehended it, you'd understand that this isn't military action so much as it is sending advisors (i.e. non-combat, US Military personnel) to help manage and organise local authorities in capturing a wanted war criminal. It's not like this is Afghanistan/bin Laden all over again.

 

As has already been established in the thread, this guy's been on the back foot already for some time, if an effort can be made to increase the help available to those actively pursuing him, it would readily speed up his bringing to justice.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit strange tbh. The way it was made with his kid, and just the guy's style. I dunno, I can't really put my finger on it but it just seemed a bit too self serving and almost like it was as much about him and the organisation as it was about supposed "justice". The guy was already at the top of the ICC list of most wanted people, so it's not like the right people weren't aware of him.

 

I think the ICC are more suited to trying to catch the man than millions of people who don't really know anything about the situation. If anything it could just make the guy more determined and resolute, it might make him harder to catch. He might take more precautions and less risks now.

 

The whole thing just seems like a huge PR stunt, and it just seems pretty bizarre in all honesty. Plus the guy is being made out to be Hitler, when in reality he's like hundreds if not thousands of other warlords. Ok his actions might be more severe and grotesque and on a larger scale but still he seems to have been elavated beyond the reality.

 

And what about when he is finally caught, if he is caught that is. Do we start a campaign against number 2 on the ICC most wanted? Just seems kind of unnecessary and unwarranted in a way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funnily enough GTA-Stu, the number 2 they showed on the ICC list actually died several years ago. I completely agree with you on his style, it seemed unnatural to me and the whole thing with his kid was weird. "You stop bad people". I didn't see any evidence of his dad doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see anything wrong with taking this guy down. Not sure how the money is being spent, and if training an infamous army is a good idea.

 

And I would like to be as optimistic as the filmmaker that if they succeed it will "change the world", but I doubt it.

 

I don't know, people can do what they want but I think I'll stay out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1) Syria is a relatively large oil producer abd even larger refiner, with an extremely valuable strategic position. So your argument is flawed.

 

2) If Western interventionism is all about oil (or resources in general), why did we invade Afghanistan at enormous cost, why did we intervene in Bosnia, Kosovo and Rwanda, and why haven't we intervened in Nigeria during their tumultuous recent past. What about the resource costs of conflict? What about Wester driven policies like the Kimberley Process?

 

Apologies for the brevity of this post and the minor derailment, but these absurd fallacies need disputing at every point they rise.

1.) guess what?

you're wrong.

 

 

Syria is a relatively small oil producer, accounting for just 0.5 percent of the global production in 2010.[16][17] Syria is not a major oil exporter by Middle Eastern standards

 

sauce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Syria#Oil

_____________________________________________________

 

2.) I didn't say Western intervention was only about oil. of course there are exceptions to the rule.

the point is that the existence of oil and/or other valuable resources is a MAJOR contributor when it comes to whether or not a country like the US will decide to stick it's nose into a conflict. this "rule" is more prevalent in the last 50 years than it was the previous century. obviously it wasn't always as important as it is lately.

 

Afghanistan has less oil than Iraq.

but you need to stop focusing on oil. I said oil AND other natural resources; oil AND other major economic incentives. not JUST oil.

and Afghanistan is RICH in more ways than just Black Gold.

 

 

Afghanistan is endowed with a wealth of natural resources, including extensive deposits of natural gas, petroleum, coal, marble, gold, copper, chromite, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, zinc, iron ore, salt, precious and semi-precious stones, and many rare earth elements.[15] In 2006, a U.S. Geological Survey estimated that Afghanistan has as much as 36 trillion cubic feet (1.0×1012 m3) of natural gas, 3.6 billion barrels (570×106 m3) of oil and condensate reserves.[16] According to a 2007 assessment, Afghanistan has significant amounts of undiscovered non-fuel mineral resources.[17] Geologists also found indications of abundant deposits of colored stones and gemstones, including emerald, ruby, sapphire, garnet, lapis, kunzite, spinel, tourmaline and peridot.[18] In 2010, U.S. Pentagon officials along with American geologists have revealed the discovery of nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan.[19]

 

sauce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Afghanistan

 

if you control the Afghan government, you control the resources and (more importantly) their extraction and shipment.

this is Economics and Modern Warfare 101. welcome to class.

Edited by El_Diablo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I actually the only one who is of the opinion that the capture of him would change as much as kicking over a bag of rice in Shanghai?

When he is gone, someone else will take his place. And he might be even worse. Can't tell me any military organisation such as the NATO wants to get involved in a bush fight in east central Africa. The US will try to get their asses out there asap.

 

Face it. We have ruined Africa.

 

Also don't pick on me like "Uh but you're supporting it, you have a signature!" or "Don't ruin the campaign!".

I do support the campaign, but I am a) quite surprised how something that has been going on for three decades is such a current affair now. And, lets be realistic here, what he said about loosing interest in the topic: it will happen anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recent talks are about the US and Israel in regard to Iran and their nuclear program, even military action there is strongly being talked down, that there won't be any rash decisions at present for combat from the USA's side of things. I tend to believe that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long_Haired_Boy

Whatever the case this dude needs to be out of commission-You don't have to attend a university to see that because no matter who or what everything has its flaws.

Edited by Long_Haired_Boy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hurr durr im involved with history in the making!!1

 

user posted image

 

Read some of the comments on that youtube video. It'll make you want to kill yourself.

 

Here's an interesting read that puts anything I could possibly say on the subject matter a lot better: http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=pass_sopa

 

 

"Protest schemes that don't cost the participants any inconvenience, hardship or money remain the most popular, despite their ineffectiveness."

-Snopes

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

apologies for the brevity of this post and further derailment, but I had to re-correct this guy's absurd fallacies.

next time you try to one-up somebody, do your research first.

Considering your citations are from Wikipedia and sivi actually has a vast knowledge of foreign affairs and such given his line of work, I couldn't help but laugh at this.

clEsyRO.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

apologies for the brevity of this post and further derailment, but I had to re-correct this guy's absurd fallacies.

next time you try to one-up somebody, do your research first.

Considering your citations are from Wikipedia and sivi actually has a vast knowledge of foreign affairs and such given his line of work, I couldn't help but laugh at this.

Ha, me too. I'm looking forward to sivis' response, he's gonna totally rip that guy a new sphincter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the articles I chose to cite are fully sourced.

 

you know that little number at the end of each sentence?

yeah, that links to the direct source from which the data was gathered.

 

Wiki articles are not inherently flawed just because they're Wikipedia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the articles I chose to cite are fully sourced.

 

you know that little number at the end of each sentence?

yeah, that links to the direct source from which the data was gathered.

 

Wiki articles are not inherently flawed just because they're Wikipedia.

We're not bashing wikipedia, we're bashing you and your arrogant condescending tone. You acted all uppety because you quoted a wikipedia article, and claimed Sivis to be lying and stupid. Instead of trying to debate the guy and actually focus on the issues you skipped over them in the belief that you'd won him at internets and knowledgez, and your raging boner nearly poked me in the eye. In actual fact you just took his statement out of context and ignored the overall point he was making.

 

Fallacise that devil boy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're not bashing wikipedia, we're bashing you and your arrogant condescending tone. You acted all uppety because you quoted a wikipedia article, and claimed Sivis to be lying and stupid. Instead of trying to debate the guy and actually focus on the issues you skipped over them in the belief that you'd won him at internets and knowledgez, and your raging boner nearly poked me in the eye. In actual fact you just took his statement out of context and ignored the overall point he was making.

 

Fallacise that devil boy.

if you thought it was arrogant and condescending that's not my problem.

 

and if you can quote the part where I called him "stupid" or said he was "lying" then you're welcome to your opinion.

but since you can't - since I never said that - your opinion sounds about as arrogant and condescending as you thought my tone was.

 

also, "raging boner?"

"won the internets?"

 

you're taking this way more seriously than I am... dozingoff.gif

chill out lol...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this video isn't an experiment in making the world a better place, it's a measure of how well today's disengaged youth respond to a well-executed propaganda piece that's centered around a good cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GTAF banners I see are just not going to provoke a change in the World, sorry to burst your bubbles, an all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the articles I chose to cite are fully sourced.

 

you know that little number at the end of each sentence?

yeah, that links to the direct source from which the data was gathered.

 

Wiki articles are not inherently flawed just because they're Wikipedia.

Easy on your high horse, pal.

 

In that case, you should be citing the article directly, not indirectly. Furthermore, did you make sure to read the sources? For all you know, someone could have linked that to something completely irrelevant. The chances of that are low, but you never know.

clEsyRO.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this video isn't an experiment in making the world a better place, it's a measure of how well today's disengaged youth respond to a well-executed propaganda piece that's centered around a good cause.

I didn't watch the video but what you said still made sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd trust Wikipedia more oft then not, and you can choose to ignore it completely, STILL, I believe there are facts presented on that site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.