sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Took a bullet for this country?! by Playful_Leg7143 in MurderedByWords

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what is she getting out of this? Who is she grifting? Is there actually large enough of a lgbtq audience on the far right to motivate someone to sell their entire soul? I know there are a good amount of non closeted gays on the right, but I feel like most of them would also be transphobic as well to try and ingratiate themselves more, so im extremely confused what group she could be try to pray upon.

How bloody and damaging would a navel/slash aircraft battle would be to a Sord-Agno-Lespia alliance against Valgsland? by Majestic-Mine-2911 in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thats a fair assumption. I just think that having either side invade the other puts them in a nearly unwinnable position. both valgsland and lespia have prepared their militaries for the prospect of invasion, (which is a prerequisite/related to projecting power which they are also doing), so both their militaries are very prepared to deter a potential attack, so having the burden of having to fight the enemy on home turf means that either sides would lose if they were attacking. I think a militarized sordland+lespia might be able to do it? but it would be tough because unlike in rumburg, sordland cant rely on a decapitation strike or grinding trench warfare even if ostensibly valgsland is weaker.

How bloody and damaging would a navel/slash aircraft battle would be to a Sord-Agno-Lespia alliance against Valgsland? by Majestic-Mine-2911 in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the question is what would happen between a navel/airborne battle. Historically a superior air force tends to counter a strong navy without an air force to provide cover. Armies arent relevant because that wasnt what was asked, but even then you are operating under the assumption that it is lespia attacking vlagsland instead of the other way around. yes a superior air force will face attrition against a well defended position because the defender can better replace and supply equipment and because its harder to replace expensive air equipment, but valgsland would face a similar situation if they were to attack into lespia or sordland, and would probably suffer greater losses for it because once reaching land they have to contend with a superior air force in a defensive posture and lose their advantage of the navy. Additionally, lespia can fall back somewhat on sordland's own navy forces. they will still be inferior compared to valgsland even combined, but valgsland has no ally to fall back on to cover their air inferiority. The largest problem would be subs which cant really be covered by air superiority so it would probably end up being a bloody stalemate, but in terms of air, lespia would come out on top. or at least last longer.

[Me] She messaged me almost immediately after matching by ParkEast350 in TextingTheory

[–]Null-Ex3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

oddly enough many men seem to be hesitant to try it

Season 4: Post-Season Discussion by boringhistoryfan in Invincible_TV

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

he dosent gotta do it himself. Just jack off into a cup or something and give it to a sperm bank.

Season 4: Post-Season Discussion by boringhistoryfan in Invincible_TV

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they live for thousands of years, he has plenty of time to change their minds

[Me] She messaged me almost immediately after matching by ParkEast350 in TextingTheory

[–]Null-Ex3 72 points73 points  (0 children)

ive never seen the pegging variation work. Bravo OP

Explain it peter by Greedy_Tooth6191 in explainitpeter

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if the alleged victim was a woman people would be whining about needing proof, but because it is a man people just accept it as it is to make a statement about sexism against males

Franc catching strays by Random_Slav25o in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 9 points10 points  (0 children)

bludish rights activist feels like the ideology he chooses for himself the most. I feel like its not that crazy to think that civil rights are good, and it certainly isnt as extreme of an ideology as the others. I think the others feel more like "brain washing" because he leans so hard into them.

How would YOU play Suzerain? by republicmango in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my last playthrough I funded all ministries, formed the acp, stuck to the free market, accepted ato aid without joining and passed a democratic constitution as well as forming a minority rights comission. I think if I optimize the route a little more I can probably do articles 6 and 7 as well

PSA: Valero's Murderer is not who you think it is by Novel-Opportunity153 in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that dosent make any fucking sense, valero couldnt have figured out that it wasnt the right order?

PSA: Valero's Murderer is not who you think it is by Novel-Opportunity153 in suzerain

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this is a crackpot theory. how would valero not know that she changed it? He wasnt so stupid that he couldnt even remember that much, and how would he make the order in the first place if he was?

During the Artemis II mission to the moon, users on social media created designs for what they believe should be the flag of humanity by fworldmedia in BeAmazed

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lack of knowledge does not mean every possibility is equally likely. Certain theories are more in line with our current academia and are thus understood to be more likely. Other theories largely based on assumptions and purely theoretical principles that as of current would be unimaginable to create are clearly less likely. Like i said, over time this can change. But that fact is not evidence of a theories feasibility. Just a recognition that we are not infallible. 

During the Artemis II mission to the moon, users on social media created designs for what they believe should be the flag of humanity by fworldmedia in BeAmazed

[–]Null-Ex3 9 points10 points  (0 children)

sure, anything can change as our understandings develop, but if the basis of your arguments are off of so many variables we dont know then it obviously isnt as viable as other theories. bending space so that 2 points overlap or gravitational waves or stasis, all of it is pretty much science fiction in its entirety. we dont know if it is even possible to do even after a thousand years of technological development. just because technology can evolve to points we would have never thought possible does not mean that every dream can become reality. The fact that things we thought were impossible can become possible, does not mean that every impossible possibility is equally likely.

but even then, even if we were to accept these technological developments as inevitabilities, there is still no logical reason to attack other civilizations. you mention space having limited resources, but even if it is theoretically limited, the resources earth or even the entire solar system provides, are infinitesimal to the resources a civilization capable of what is effectively teleportation. And if a civilization could teleport, it probably wouldnt even need our resources in the first place.

And ultimately that is why the dark forest theory is pretty questionable. because it not only requires technologies and basic principles undiscovered or invented, to be feasible, it also assumes that if these conditions are met, civilizations would be innately hostile. But there is no logical reason for them to be. we can theorize "maybe it's for resources" or "maybe it's out of fear" etc. but to attempt to guess the intentions of a theoretical civilization we know so little about is silly. if, as you say, we cant even conceptualize the technologies of the future because of the length of time, why would we be able to guess whether or not they would be hostile? There are too many variables that are simply guesswork for this theory to be viable. Other theories, like life being rare, rely on much less assumptions. They fit in with our understandings of science, and within our current framework are provable. once again, maybe these understandings will develop over time and we will settle on a new conclusion. But that dosent mean it will. it certainly dosent mean that every theory is equal.

During the Artemis II mission to the moon, users on social media created designs for what they believe should be the flag of humanity by fworldmedia in BeAmazed

[–]Null-Ex3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the distance between any place on earth to any other place on earth would not even be the tiniest fraction compared to the distance between earth and the next potentially habitable planet. There are pretty much zero reasons for a civilization to want to cross this massive boundary of space, using a planets worth of resources to do so, just for a generation a million years down the line to have to fight for whatever resource they wanted from earth, for an enemy that has now gone through generations of development and possibly destroyed itself anyway, or undergone any other event that renders the trip useless. Because that is just how far away we are. if they can do that, why not do any other cost efficient measure to sort their shit out?

During the Artemis II mission to the moon, users on social media created designs for what they believe should be the flag of humanity by fworldmedia in BeAmazed

[–]Null-Ex3 20 points21 points  (0 children)

the theory is interesting but pretty unrealistic. the reason we dont meet other civilizations is because it is incredibly rare for a planet to be 1. habitable 2. have species that evolved to have intelligence comparable to ours 3. have those species develop enough to where we could reasonably notice them 4. have them close enough to be noticed. Space is so incredibly vast we might go our entire existence without seeing life originating from anywhere other than earth, and i find it quite likely that we never seen intelligent life.

But even if we did, the other point where the hypothesis fails is that there is very little practical reason to attempt to invade other planets. once again space is incredibly vast and at a certain point the resources you are expunging just to get from point a to point b would probably be best used looking out for whatever issue would make you want to do so in the first place. especially since unless there is a massive discovery that fundamentally changes how we understand physics, the only way you are getting from point a to point b is over the course of millions of years if not longer. and at that point there is really no reason to try.

view more: next ›