Question of Men

Collarchat.com

Create a
Free Account

As the Collar Turns:

Collarchat.com - BDSM Forum

Home Login Search

Espanol

Deutsch

Francais

Italiano

Portugues

Question of Men

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> Question of Men

Page: [1]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Question of Men - 4/17/2011 3:39:40 AM

Terrah

Posts: 372
Joined: 7/5/2007
Status: offline

Greetings men of Gor,

In recent times we have come upon a saga of what I term as civil war in Libya. Of course my views of such things come only from a woman's perspective, but I was wondering and frankly would like to see some comment from men on this subject.

Do you see Libya as a civil war that should be taken care of by the protesters of that country or do you think the US should get involved into this conflict due to the fact they are now being bombed by their govt's leader? Or do you see this as perhaps a way to goad the US into heading into another war? For that matter should Nato be in charge of this?

The reason I asked is because I feel that the media is representing a side of this to get the US to move into another conflict because they are using our own pride into coming to the rescue of those who would be ruled by another, vs freedom or whatever they call it over there from the rebels side.

I don't see this as anything more than a civil war over there, perhaps I am wrong I don't know, but having the views of Gorean men on this is indeed interesting to me.

Thanks in advance for your input on this.

Terrah

_____________________________

"Courage is being scared to death and saddling up anyhow." (John Wayne)

Post #: 1

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 5:36:38 AM

xBullx

Posts: 3962
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline

Neither side of this Libyan conflict are people I see as, allied with or belonging to the "American Home Stone", if you will. The so-called "leader" of this country is a well documented enemy of the US and the people we appear to be supporting are, at best, strangers to us. So why meddle where life was serving it's own purpose. As far as the typical excuse that it is humanitarian or because of US interests/resources, it is my opinion that we have no actual US interests in this country, not even their oil, they sold primarily to China in my understanding.

All the world is a Kaissa Board and frankly I have been becoming more and more suspicious that pouring money and material into this conflict is yet another board move to deplete the US of it's economic resources. There is a very complex game in play and I suspect that when we recognize it, it just might be too late to save our own "Home Stone".

Consider this:

One cannot, in effect, execute a hostile takeover of fiscally strong and well respected company/country.

I see dust on the horizon.

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull

I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to Terrah)

Post #: 2

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 7:09:07 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 16616
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

their oil

Libyan crude is light oil, ideal for jet fuel and kerosene. To replace it takes four times as much oil. No matter where it's sold, that's a significant market impact.

That said, a century of going to war for oil is not a platform I support. But it is what's happening.

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to xBullx)

Post #: 3

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 7:46:27 AM

xBullx

Posts: 3962
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline

Is this your "Gorean" man's perspective of the OP's query or is this just another of those "ultra-left leaning" snipes designed to save face and or defend the present administration of the world at large.

But, to expand on what I assume is your point, it is my understanding that we have massive reserves (more than all the world supplies combined) of this light sweet crude right off our own cost. No wars required to harvest it, unless you call the environmental obstructionists and their destructive rhetoric some heroic brand of conflict.

quote:

To replace it takes four times as much oil.

I'm not sure what you are replacing it with, maybe whale oil. But if you're referring to replacing it with shale oil or Bitumen (mainly from Canada, Hugoville/Venezuela and a few others including the US) it is my impression that it doesn't take 4 times the quanity, rather it is the harvesting efforts and methods that require more energy, time and ability. Maybe bankrolling these havesting factors in opposition to financing conflict would make a more logical investment of our "Home Stones" human and financial resources.

edited to add substance..

< Message edited by xBullx -- 4/17/2011 8:02:27 AM >

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull

I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 4

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 10:51:24 AM

blacksword404

Posts: 1601
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terrah

Greetings men of Gor,

In recent times we have come upon a saga of what I term as civil war in Libya. Of course my views of such things come only from a woman's perspective, but I was wondering and frankly would like to see some comment from men on this subject.

Do you see Libya as a civil war that should be taken care of by the protesters of that country or do you think the US should get involved into this conflict due to the fact they are now being bombed by their govt's leader? Or do you see this as perhaps a way to goad the US into heading into another war? For that matter should Nato be in charge of this?

The reason I asked is because I feel that the media is representing a side of this to get the US to move into another conflict because they are using our own pride into coming to the rescue of those who would be ruled by another, vs freedom or whatever they call it over there from the rebels side.

I don't see this as anything more than a civil war over there, perhaps I am wrong I don't know, but having the views of Gorean men on this is indeed interesting to me.

Thanks in advance for your input on this.

Terrah

Greetings terra,

He should have been killed long ago. But as things are now, it has turned into a civil war. And we are firmly on one side of it. I don't think we should be openly backing them. I would have favored funneling some light weapons to them or doing what the priest kings would do. Send in tarl, or in our case some covert ops to ring his bell.

The only problem I have with this whole things that from what I am hearing he is firing at rebels now and not civilians. For us to tell him he can't fire on rebels that are actively shooting at his soldiers and trying to overthrow him is silly. What leader would allow his hands to be tied that way?

Luckily for us he has not used his trump card yet. If he starts yelling to the Muslim world that he needs help. That the west is down there trying to take over another Muslim country. Things could explode from there.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to Terrah)

Post #: 5

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 12:32:24 PM

SnowRanger

Posts: 442
Joined: 5/25/2008
From: Sinsinnati
Status: offline

Hello,

I am not a Gorean but I am going to weigh in anyway.

I am not really fond of Quadaffi or Kadaffi (boy is spell check having a fit!)... Mommar. Still he has been moderating toward the United States in recent years. The President has announced a policy that he has to go. Still, I find myself in the "Better-the-devil-you-know" school. Obviously, I'm ambivalent about whether he stays or goes.

My town has a major highway through it that carries a lot of cars from Canada. One of them bore a bumper sticker that read "NOT EVERY PROBLEM IN THE WORLD REQUIRES AN AMERICAN SOLUTION." That message can be read a lot of different ways: but, I read it as an offer to step up.

As a typical American, my Geography is a bit fuzzy (those DAMNED Social Studies Classes).
Be that as it may, I am reliably informed that just North of Libya is a continent called Europe. This continent is chock full of countries with strong economies and fairly strong military forces. Libya was colonized by one or more of these countries. HHMMMM... I wonder....

I see it as a civil war. Other countries stayed (for the most part) out of our Civil War. We should return the favor. If there are humanitarian concerns, I am sure that Europe is filled with all sorts of nice people champing at the bit to help. Who are we to shoulder them aside and do it ourselves?

I suppose that these are just random thoughts on the passing scene in Libya. I hope that you find them worthy of discussion.

Helping Atlas Shrug,
Mike
SnowRanger

< Message edited by SnowRanger -- 4/17/2011 12:42:33 PM >

_____________________________

You can't help where you were born; and, you may not have much to say about where you die; but, you can and you should try to pass the days in between as a good man.
Anton Myrer Once an Eagle

(in reply to blacksword404)

Post #: 6

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 12:46:06 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 16616
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

I'm not sure what you are replacing it with, maybe whale oil. But if you're referring to replacing it with shale oil or Bitumen (mainly from Canada, Hugoville/Venezuela and a few others including the US) it is my impression that it doesn't take 4 times the quanity, rather it is the harvesting efforts and methods that require more energy, time and ability.

Bull, you're mixing two different points.

All oil is not the same. It would take four times as much Saudi oil, for example.

Drilling for coastal oil here is a different issue. The main barrier there is cost, and as the price of oil rises, the incentive to drill increases. Same with interior deposits.

None of that has anything at all to do with left/right political views, so I don't see your point there. Just factual market matters.

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to xBullx)

Post #: 7

RE: Question of Men - 4/17/2011 4:19:57 PM

Awareness

Posts: 1297
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

A saga? Don't be ridiculous.

This looks like a thinly-veiled attempt to start the usual bickering between Conservatives and Liberals under the guise of some vague reference to 'Gorean perspective'.

Consider: While Conservatives and Liberals bicker and play the adult version of "my dad can beat up your dad", their leaders of both stripes propagate a system which enshrines corruption. It requires a particular combination of blind stupidity and ignorance to not realise the inherent tribalism in declaring yourself for one or the other.

A free man thinks for himself. I encourage participants to do likewise in such discussions without resorting to ad-hominem attacks upon the opposing faction's leader.

It is difficult for many people to examine Libya from a perspective which removes American self-interest. At the heart of the discussion are certain difficult questions.

If a people is ruled by a tyrant, does a foreign power have any kind of moral right to attempt to remove him? Is that moral right undermined when that foreign power only seeks to remove tyrants who block their access to useful resources such as oil?

From a certain perspective, this is all a game. You can remove a tyrant if you win the moral war. That is, if you convince your peer nations that doing so is the morally right thing to do. However, in and of itself, there is no way for America to divorce its self-interest from such engagements. Thus, there is no inherently justified reason for intervening which is based purely on morality or altruism.

Unfortunately, Americans are as amenable to nationalism as the Germans were in WWII. Whipping the plebs into a patriotic, unthinking fervour is something Fox does on a regular basis. And so many opinions are ill-formed, deriving as they do from a very finite set of information sources and an exceptionally myopic world view. One of the things I've noted is the criticism being leveled at the President for not going in sooner with all guns blazing. Those making such criticisms really do not understand geopolitics or just how America's reputation and interests have suffered in the past decade or so from doing exactly that.

First, the moral war must be won. This is always a necessary first step, unless you seek to become an international pariah.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 8

RE: Question of Men - 4/19/2011 2:30:35 PM

Terrah

Posts: 372
Joined: 7/5/2007
Status: offline

Thank you all for your responses, I asked just the men due to the fact that it is mainly men who fight these things, and should determine the fate of our country, so goes my belief. I wanted to know if y'all thought this a civil war, in my opinion that would mean of course civilians would be involved in the fighting, that is what it is about... yes? I am not up on war type issues, surely I have an opinion, but it hardly matters on this subject. Please do continue the conversation, it is very interesting to me.

_____________________________

"Courage is being scared to death and saddling up anyhow." (John Wayne)

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 9

RE: Question of Men - 4/19/2011 5:11:50 PM

Koa

Posts: 283
Joined: 7/27/2005
Status: offline

It is a civil war.

We can not afford to enter another war. We are over 1 trillion in debt to other countries, whom already want that debt paid. With the U.S. dollar dropping in value like a rock in space burning up as it enters the atmosphere, we will not be able to pay off any debt anytime soon. The U.S. government needs to worry about and concentrate on U.S. recovery and not about what other countries are doing. Yes these wars and other country politics may affect us in the long run but there is nothing the U.S. can do if there is no U.S. government. And cutting funding from schools making a dumb country (at the bottom of the top 10 leading countries in education) even dumber is well dumb. That would put the U.S. where in the education ladder, somewhere from 15th – 20th out of the top 20 countries.
I say “Save the U.S. first... the world second.”

< Message edited by Koa -- 4/19/2011 5:15:29 PM >

_____________________________

Lo Koa Bosk

...but to take truth for granted is not to know it. Truth not won is not possessed. We are not entitled to truths for which we have not fought.
(Marauders, p.7)

(in reply to Terrah)

Post #: 10

RE: Question of Men - 4/19/2011 8:58:35 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 16616
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

While I agree with some of what you say, let's not perpetuate myths, as that prevents making sound decisions.

The fall in the dollar was previously, when we abandoned saving for entering elective wars. In 2002, the euro was worth $.87, and by December 2007, the euro was $1.44. But as of April 8, 2011, the euro is worth $1.47. Hardly a precipitous fall.

Yes, we carry a lot of debt, more than we should, but the sky isn't falling. Our GDP is $15 trillion (we carried higher debt as a percentage of GDP during WWII)--that's 1/5 of the world's economy. We're hardly paupers. Our GDP is more than twice China's. And no one is demanding debt back--they're investing because, even now, the U.S. is a solid investment relative to the rest of the world (a relativity important in exchange rates), which is why they're investing in Treasuries. And incidentally, the EU holds more of our debt than China, and the majority of the debt is held by U.S. citizens.

The question of how Gorean this all shakes out is interesting. Take the oil discussion Bull mentioned. If we're going by how men on Gor would act, they'd take all they could, to the limits of others' swords. Yet the Priest Kings limit technology, largely for this reason--including the technologies of war. So which is Gorean? Then we have Norman, through Tarl's narration, repeatedly stressing the clean air and environment on Gor, lamenting the environmental decline of Earth. We know that Goreans originated from Earth stock--so is the Gorean tendency to run amuk until stopped the Gorean way, or is Norman's construct of a planet protected from homo sapiens destructive tendencies Gorean? When we ask "What would be the Gorean approach?", which should we be discussing?

My own view has always been that the novels play out several Earth threads in Norman's thought-environment of a sister planet with different conditions. But the question posed is challenging, because Norman's construct would prevent both our current oil technology and "advanced" means of warfare--not to mention large nations vs. the city states of Gor.

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Koa)

Post #: 11

RE: Question of Men - 4/19/2011 11:23:44 PM

Koa

Posts: 283
Joined: 7/27/2005
Status: offline

If I am wrong on the issue and I'm sure I am, since I only get my info bit by bit from here and there, then I stand corrected. Thank you.

What would Goreans do in this situation, the same thing any human would, take what they can.

Lets put it in a Gorean setting,

A city in the Tahari, who’s major export is salt, is in civil unrest. The Ubar of the city, we will call Ly, is not very well liked and the Ubar’s term has come to an end but he refuses to step down. The citizens are trying to dislodge him from his tower but neither side is winning. The city of Ar is not doing so well economical after its long war with Cos. The Ubar of Ar decides to take it upon himself to order tarn strikes on the city Ly without consulting the city council first. Days later the army of Ar has done nothing to the balance in civil war.

Does Ar continue trying to help the rebels by supplying them with men, weapons and or food, in hopes to get in on the salt trade, when the salt is exported mainly to other cities anyway, and when Ar gets most of its salt from other cities?

< Message edited by Koa -- 4/19/2011 11:24:16 PM >

_____________________________

Lo Koa Bosk

...but to take truth for granted is not to know it. Truth not won is not possessed. We are not entitled to truths for which we have not fought.
(Marauders, p.7)

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 12

RE: Question of Men - 4/20/2011 4:58:46 AM

Malkinius

Posts: 1584
Joined: 1/9/2004
Status: online

{fast reply}

Greetings all.....

I will point out that the US already has a history of intervening in that area. You do remember the bit from the song about "From the Halls of Montzuma to the shore of Tripoli," don't you? Maybe it is getting time to send in the Marines, again? <grins>

Be well all....

Malkinius

_____________________________

A questioner by inclination...An Auctioneer for the fun of it
http://www.HouseMalkinius.com The goal is beauty.

(in reply to Koa)

Post #: 13

RE: Question of Men - 4/20/2011 7:27:44 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 16616
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Does Ar continue trying to help the rebels by supplying them with men, weapons and or food, in hopes to get in on the salt trade, when the salt is exported mainly to other cities anyway, and when Ar gets most of its salt from other cities?

Which brings us back to my original post...

quote:

Libyan crude is light oil, ideal for jet fuel and kerosene. To replace it takes four times as much oil. No matter where it's sold, that's a significant market impact.

I don't like it anymore than you--but we can't accurately say there's no reason.

And Malkinius is correct...this isn't something that just popped up.

_____________________________

Yes, I still update my blog--thanks to all who asked!
http://writingtrue.blogspot.com
Gorean FAQ Threads

(in reply to Koa)

Post #: 14

RE: Question of Men - 4/30/2011 10:54:20 AM

ownedbyPF

Posts: 126
Joined: 2/18/2010
Status: offline

So this question interested me, mainly because I've been wrapped up in the planning and execution of what is going on in Libya for the past couple of months.

I disagree that this is about oil, for two reasons:

1. Oil contracts would be more secure with the western European nations if we had stayed out of it. Qadhafi would have continued to sell to the west (mainly Italy) if we had done nothing. We (including NATO) have done nothing to make our positon more secure vis-a-vis oil contracts by interfereing.

2. Italy (where most of the Libyan oil is sold) is still getting most of the previous supply. It's only down about 20%. Prices haven't risen much here.

From a Gorean standpoint, we should have done everything that the Opposition asked for, then negotiated the best contracts possible. Or completely thrown them to the wolf. That would have been a clear national interest. Instead, we set the conditions that would ensure a stalemate.....First by waiting too long, then by turning it over to NATO before the tide had clearly turned in the Opposition favor. Now, we have ensured a situation that will result in either a divided Libya (with our sworn enemy controling the means of production of Oil). In fact, if you wanted a text book example of doing everything possible to completely fuck the national interests of the US and make sure that oil prices go up, you couldn't design a better strategy.

The only rational reason for the use of force is for natural resources...Blood for Oil is completly reasonable. Every war since the revolution (with a couple of notable exceptions run by democrats) has been about resources. But you should always keep what you kill (yes, I know that is a poor reference to a bad movie). Unfortuantely that's not what the US does. If we had used our military in a rational manner, we would own 2/3 of the world.....

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 15

RE: Question of Men - 4/30/2011 10:57:04 AM

Ph0enixF1re

Posts: 91
Joined: 5/11/2006
Status: offline

shit.....Logged in as the slave...although she thinks the same thing....Because she has not thoughts of her own :)

_____________________________

Absolute power corrupts absolutely...But it absolutely ROCKS!!!!!

Holier than thou and yes...Better than you.

(in reply to ownedbyPF)

Post #: 16

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> Question of Men

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2012

Collarchat.com is a member of the Free Speech Coalition

Terms of Service

0.155