I decided to scratch off another question on my list of "bad ideas for threads", list. You get to wipe out any country in the world. Kill everyone currently residing in it. You can pick one, but only one. You also have to pick one. It's one of those cosmic dick moves. You press a button they all just drop dead. Which country would you pick and why? For the purposes of this thread a "country" is an internationally recognized state. For instance Russia or the US. You can't just pick part of a country, like Wales. To get the Welsh you have to pick the UK and kill off the Scottish as well. One exception is Somalia which has no government but has recognized borders. So if you pick Somalia you get all the people in the borders of Somalia.
I pick Pakistan, cause they are jerks. I was thinking of India cause I would get more people, and I really don't care of India that well, but they've never done anything really annoying to deserve it. I'm curious which country Jake will pick.
Saudi Arabia.
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
Jake will pick nothing. BB is a watchfull eye and, as canadian, we can't advocate genocide.
The Vatican. It's the world's smallest country in population, so you would be killing the least people.
Plus, the sudden death of the Vatican would look amusingly like the act of an angry God in full on Biblical mode. :D
And you wonder why we think you're mentally unbalanced, Raz. Or maybe you don't.
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 10:53:12 AM
Saudi Arabia.
And here I would have put money on you picking Vatican City.
As for me, it's gotta be China.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 18, 2012, 11:10:25 AM
And you wonder why we think you're mentally unbalanced, Raz. Or maybe you don't.
I do not. And you partially inspired this poll.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 10:54:34 AM
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
And what, you think being indecisive is going to endear yourself to voters or something?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:14:55 AMAnd you partially inspired this poll.
Preemptive limited nuclear strike /= genocide
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 10:54:34 AM
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
And what, you think being indecisive is going to endear yourself to voters or something?
He'll run into trouble anyways. Being a hipster is unamerican.
The US. Guess they shouldn't have made Alaska a state.
Quote from: Neil on October 18, 2012, 11:18:00 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:16:34 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 10:54:34 AM
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
And what, you think being indecisive is going to endear yourself to voters or something?
He'll run into trouble anyways. Being a hipster is unamerican.
Hasn't he admitted drug use on this forum? That doesn't do you any favors.
Guess we need to deport Katmai to Mexico if Brain ever gets access to nukes. :hmm:
Quote from: Neil on October 18, 2012, 11:12:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 10:53:12 AM
Saudi Arabia.
And here I would have put money on you picking Vatican City.
As for me, it's gotta be China.
I don't think Vatican is such a good idea.
If the genocide targets all people within the borders of a country at the time when it occurs, then you would be killing a lot of innocent tourists.
If it targets only "citizens" of a given country, then most cardinals etc. wouldn't be affected, as they are formally citizens of their home countries and not of Vatican (I am not even sure whether Vatican has official citizenship, but I assume they must have something).
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
Quote from: Neil on October 18, 2012, 11:12:23 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 10:53:12 AM
Saudi Arabia.
And here I would have put money on you picking Vatican City.
As for me, it's gotta be China.
I don't think Vatican is such a good idea.
If the genocide targets all people within the borders of a country at the time when it occurs, then you would be killing a lot of innocent tourists.
If it targets only "citizens" of a given country, then most cardinals etc. wouldn't be affected, as they are formally citizens of their home countries and not of Vatican (I am not even sure whether Vatican has official citizenship, but I assume they must have something).
Innocence proves nothing.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 10:54:34 AM
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
Do you really think that you could have a government career, if the government knew about Languish posting past? :D
If I say Russia, do I get the Poles, too?
I think expectations will be relaxed somewhat after people who have grown up with internet start coming to power. So typical Languish banter may be given a pass. But calling for genocide isn't really typical, except from Neil and CDM.
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:28:16 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 10:54:34 AM
I was going to post, but I really want a position in government at some point in my life. :lol:
Do you really think that you could have a government career, if the government knew about Languish posting past? :D
Most of the jobs I am interested in wouldn't mind that I'm extremely opinionated on history. Or that I smoked pot in College so I could deepen my appreciation of Paprika. Casually endorsing genocide? Not so much.
I also just think it's wrong. Pakistan is a geostrategic nuisance and an almost inevitable source of disaster that is built upon anti-Hindu hatred, but there's a ton of culture there that is worth saving from the Salafis, the Taliban and all the other idiots. Just killing people would make us worse than the worst Pakistan has to offer.
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
I'm not doing a national Sophie's Choice. That's perverse.
Quote from: Grey Fox on October 18, 2012, 10:56:46 AM
Jake will pick nothing. BB is a watchfull eye and, as canadian, we can't advocate genocide.
It's not advocating genocide any more than answering the trite "if you could go back in time, would you kill baby Hitler" conundrum is advocating child murder. :huh:
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
I'm not doing a national Sophie's Choice. That's perverse.
You know you want to, otherwise you wouldn't have posted in this thread.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
I'm not doing a national Sophie's Choice. That's perverse.
Why not? I find this attitude puzzling - noone is asking you to endorse genocide, you are being asked a hypothetical. Most ethical dilemmas debated in philosophy and ethics classes concern the hypothetical of people involved performing an action that is considered immoral by their standards - I have never seen anyone refusing to participate in such exercises on moral grounds.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:44:02 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
I'm not doing a national Sophie's Choice. That's perverse.
You know you want to, otherwise you wouldn't have posted in this thread.
His reaction betrays some deep and dark psychological undercurrents that he is afraid to confront, imho.
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:46:12 AM
I have never seen anyone refusing to participate in such exercises on moral grounds.
fahdiz would.
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:47:25 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:44:02 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 18, 2012, 11:39:02 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 18, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
It's not "us" it's just you. Like crazy space aliens came down and forced you to choose.
I'm not doing a national Sophie's Choice. That's perverse.
You know you want to, otherwise you wouldn't have posted in this thread.
His reaction betrays some deep and dark psychological undercurrents that he is afraid to confront, imho.
Undercurrents that his long monologues on race theory haven't already betrayed?
:rolleyes:
Biological anthropology isn't race theory.
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:42:43 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on October 18, 2012, 10:56:46 AM
Jake will pick nothing. BB is a watchfull eye and, as canadian, we can't advocate genocide.
It's not advocating genocide any more than answering the trite "if you could go back in time, would you kill baby Hitler" conundrum is advocating child murder. :huh:
I rather not let BB make that judgement call.
;)
Sealand
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:46:12 AM
I have never seen anyone refusing to participate in such exercises on moral grounds.
Which says much about the circles you travel in.
Moral and professional grounds here.
And seriously, Marti? Morals have long been linked to the acceptance of experimentation. Pavlov's dog? Stanford prison experiment? Neither of those ring any bells (pun totally intended, BTW)?
Moral cowardice is revolting.
Quote from: Grey Fox on October 18, 2012, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:42:43 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on October 18, 2012, 10:56:46 AM
Jake will pick nothing. BB is a watchfull eye and, as canadian, we can't advocate genocide.
It's not advocating genocide any more than answering the trite "if you could go back in time, would you kill baby Hitler" conundrum is advocating child murder. :huh:
I rather not let BB make that judgement call.
;)
:(
I choose the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
The country with the most languish users. Or Poland.
Quote from: Alexandru H. on October 18, 2012, 01:00:12 PM
The country with the most languish users.
Have fun being ruled by Putin.
Quote from: Malthus on October 18, 2012, 10:57:58 AM
The Vatican. It's the world's smallest country in population, so you would be killing the least people.
Plus, the sudden death of the Vatican would look amusingly like the act of an angry God in full on Biblical mode. :D
Damn, great minds think alike. :unsure:
Quote from: Kleves on October 18, 2012, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:46:12 AM
I have never seen anyone refusing to participate in such exercises on moral grounds.
fahdiz would.
The funny thing about his reaction to Defcon is that he played EU2 all the time, a game where you can commit numerous atrocities, including genocide, and are often if not almost always rewarded for it.
Oh, and as a pragmatist I must choose Mexico. Next move is the Homestead Act of 2013. :)
Quote from: Ideologue on October 18, 2012, 06:19:16 PM
Quote from: Kleves on October 18, 2012, 11:49:43 AM
Quote from: Martinus on October 18, 2012, 11:46:12 AM
I have never seen anyone refusing to participate in such exercises on moral grounds.
fahdiz would.
The funny thing about his reaction to Defcon is that he played EU2 all the time, a game where you can commit numerous atrocities, including genocide, and are often if not almost always rewarded for it.
That's a bit unfair and insensitive. We know little about the personal histories of other people, and actions that may seem odd are often explained by previous experiences. FWIW I find it likely that sometime in his youth fahdiz witnessed global thermonuclear war and it undoubtedly scarred him deeply. Mocking him for that is immature and a bit offensive.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on October 18, 2012, 12:14:13 PM
Moral and professional grounds here.
And seriously, Marti? Morals have long been linked to the acceptance of experimentation. Pavlov's dog? Stanford prison experiment? Neither of those ring any bells (pun totally intended, BTW)?
SERIOUSLY??? These are not "hypothetical moral dilemmas". These experiments involved directly harming animals and psychological torture applied to people, respectively. Are you really that fucking stupid to consider them an equivalent of answering a hypothetical question??? Fucking piece of shit.
The US unless you turn over Raz to The Hague
Vatican City.
For fewest possible deaths (and a guaranteed 100% Libertarian hit rate) Sealand (http://www.sealandgov.org/), Vatican City will take out a whole bunch of non-theist tourists.
Quote from: Viking on October 19, 2012, 05:56:30 AM
For fewest possible deaths (and a guaranteed 100% Libertarian hit rate) Sealand (http://www.sealandgov.org/), Vatican City will take out a whole bunch of non-theist tourists.
But it WOULD take out the Pope and Pope-lovers, theist or otherwise.
Quote from: Brazen on October 19, 2012, 06:01:15 AM
Quote from: Viking on October 19, 2012, 05:56:30 AM
For fewest possible deaths (and a guaranteed 100% Libertarian hit rate) Sealand (http://www.sealandgov.org/), Vatican City will take out a whole bunch of non-theist tourists.
But it WOULD take out the Pope and Pope-lovers, theist or otherwise.
You don't have to be a Pope-lover to appreciate art.
So, when all you fruity cynically over-read, snot-nosed Eurogoofs talk about wiping out the Home Office in Rome, are we talking neutron bomb, or conventional munitions?
There's a quite a bit of art, architecture and other historical items that I'm sure western civilization would appreciate keeping around during your hipster rampage. Or does the Sistine Chapel get Apple stickers on it?
Genocide in its common usage seldom involves destroying the country itself as it's often carried out my people who want that country, works of art and all.
If I were being philanthropic. I'd go for Luxembourg. No-one would miss it and its wealth could be distributed to the poorest countries in the world.
Quote from: Brazen on October 19, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
Genocide in its common usage seldom involves destroying the country itself as it's often carried out my people who want that country, works of art and all.
If I were being philanthropic. I'd go for Luxembourg. No-one would miss it and its wealth could be distributed to the poorest countries in the world.
Or Monaco.
Then we're just destroying rich people and getting rid of a tax haven.
Quote from: Brazen on October 19, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
Genocide in its common usage seldom involves destroying the country itself as it's often carried out my people who want that country, works of art and all.
If I were being philanthropic. I'd go for Luxembourg. No-one would miss it and its wealth could be distributed to the poorest countries in the world.
Nah, not Luxembourg. Only Germanic country with proper croissants (the Viennese might have invented them but they're nothing special) and there are many Porkchops there :mad:
I see nothing wrong with running the tables on the Iberian Eggplants, myself. 2,000+ municipal blood feasts a year? That's a lot of bulls that would appreciate no longer having their horns set on fire and trampled through villages, ducks hung by their wings and dunked for sport, and goats getting tossed out of 6 story towers. Should start doing it with Spanish toddlers instead.
Quote from: Tyr on October 19, 2012, 06:25:26 AM
Quote from: Brazen on October 19, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
Genocide in its common usage seldom involves destroying the country itself as it's often carried out my people who want that country, works of art and all.
If I were being philanthropic. I'd go for Luxembourg. No-one would miss it and its wealth could be distributed to the poorest countries in the world.
Or Monaco.
Then we're just destroying rich people and getting rid of a tax haven.
Because rich people are terrible. :rolleyes:
Quote from: garbon on October 19, 2012, 06:48:31 AM
Because rich people are terrible. :rolleyes:
You're not terrible, g.
If only I were rich. :(
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 19, 2012, 06:05:27 AM
So, when all you fruity cynically over-read, snot-nosed Eurogoofs talk about wiping out the Home Office in Rome, are we talking neutron bomb, or conventional munitions?
There's a quite a bit of art, architecture and other historical items that I'm sure western civilization would appreciate keeping around during your hipster rampage. Or does the Sistine Chapel get Apple stickers on it?
I guess reading the OP was impossible for your poor brain. And if you want to ignore it then look no further than Rwanda for how you can kill people while not harming your precious material things.
Quote from: The Brain on October 19, 2012, 06:54:34 AMI guess reading the OP was impossible for your poor brain. And if you want to ignore it then look no further than Rwanda for how you can kill people while not harming your precious material things.
I don't bother with OPs, as each thread on Languish is my personal kitty litter box.
The Rwanda genocide? Yeah, I'm sure the mountain gorillas appreciated how the Rwandans kept all that poaching among themselves. No, no collateral damage in genocides.
Now eat my litter clumps, fucknut.
Quote from: Viking on October 19, 2012, 05:56:30 AM
For fewest possible deaths (and a guaranteed 100% Libertarian hit rate) Sealand (http://www.sealandgov.org/), Vatican City will take out a whole bunch of non-theist tourists.
Sealand is hardly an internationally recognized state.
New Jersey, getting rid of Snooki and her guido pals in one, single stroke.
Quote from: Drakken on October 19, 2012, 09:26:23 AM
New Jersey, getting rid of Snooki and her guido pals in one, single stroke.
Cape May is nice though.
Quote from: Brazen on October 19, 2012, 06:20:19 AM
If I were being philanthropic. I'd go for Luxembourg. No-one would miss it and its wealth could be distributed to the poorest countries in the world.
How would that help? Giving money to poor countries is like giving money to poor people: It only makes things worse.
Quote from: garbon on October 19, 2012, 09:29:44 AM
Quote from: Drakken on October 19, 2012, 09:26:23 AM
New Jersey, getting rid of Snooki and her guido pals in one, single stroke.
Cape May is nice though.
Annex it to Delaware first.
Quote from: Neil on October 19, 2012, 10:41:17 AM
How would that help? Giving money to poor countries is like giving money to poor people: It only makes things worse.
You're heartless. Third world kleptocrats depend on our generosity :angry:
So I can pick only one country? :(
Can I at least threaten all the rest of the world afterwards? Don't want kinks in my plans for world domination after all.