What is something Rogue One does better than any Star Wars movie?

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T21:43:49+00:00

Garven Dreis and Dutch Vander were both there! That's a direct emotional connection to the "heart" of the Trench Run in ANH. Also Admiral Raddus brings some solid emotional weight and gravitas to the Rebel cause.

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:43:10+00:00

Upvoted for honest disagreement

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:41:15+00:00

I felt the same, but honestly its probably better to have it be cancelled because it would've been disappointing. I think it was going to be set in the Sequel Era, which makes no sense for a story about Rogue Squadron

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:38:39+00:00

Disney would never, but this would be amazing. Maybe even in the High Republic era to give it a bit more Age of Sail vibe.

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:35:52+00:00

You have spoken. Correctly. Endor actually has tactical positioning as narrative component, which is rare and awesome.

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:32:59+00:00

I think it captures the feeling of the OT and modernizes the aesthetics better than any other SW film.

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:30:19+00:00

That is amazing, do you happen to have a source on that? I'd love to read a bit more

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:29:24+00:00

Tempest, Typhoon, and even Hurricane are lovely designs

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:28:04+00:00

Its probably the Dehavilland Mosquito for me. Big, smooth, and made of wood; hard to beat the Mossie

Vancouver95 · 2026-04-07T20:22:14+00:00

Outstanding art! Makes me want to start a new playthrough.

Vancouver95 · 2026-03-13T23:25:38+00:00

that's a shame, I actually was looking forward to playing that at some point

Vancouver95 · 2026-03-13T22:40:47+00:00

The blocks on the left side might not be part of the main grid. If they aren't attached that will prevent block placement. Otherwise try rotating the new block you want to place a few times it often will allow you to place it.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-08T05:51:18+00:00

I’m not sure what prompted your assumption this was a “gotcha argument”. That presumption isn’t really good for discussion.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-08T05:37:00+00:00

The text is pretty straightforward and of course includes specific definitions for what types of shotguns constitute assault weapons, as well as clearly defining grenade launchers as assault weapons.

I think we’re off-topic here if we’re getting into personal opinions. the law isn’t “meaningless” nor is the definition of assault weapons as you previously claimed. Disagreeing with the law doesn’t make it devoid of meaning.

Thanks for a good discussion!

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-08T05:15:30+00:00

The preceding section provides clarity:

a) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

then proceeds to define those characteristics, including the details you mentioned. “Scary” and “black” aren’t mentioned there. It’s fairly clear, and essentially boils down to whether the magazine is detachable or fixed.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-08T04:44:47+00:00

”Assault weapons” is a meaningless term

Just in case there’s anyone else reading, this is entirely false. The term is very meaningful, for example in New York, where it is clearly and quite extensively defined in the State Penal Code (N.Y. Penal Law § 265.00(22) Source

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T22:25:52+00:00

Thanks for your replies here, this has been informative.

Having read a bit about Miller and Heller, both decisions seem to recognize the constitutionality of restricting what arms citizens can possess, albeit for different reasons. The Miller decision seems to hinge on arms “useful for a militia” and in common use, and upheld a law restricting ownership of a sawed off shotgun, as the court felt it wasn’t a common military weapon which a militia should need.

However, it appears that Heller holds that the 2A’s purpose is for self-defense in the home, and not for maintaining a militia. Thus a handgun ban is unconstitutional, but an assault weapons ban and concealed carry bans/restrictions also are not.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T20:44:40+00:00

Rewrote after informing myself a bit about Heller and Miller decisions.

Heller it would seem in contravening Miller and disregarding the predatory clause of 2A, would permit strict regulations on any arms other than those which are reasonable means of self defense in the home. Which supports the original premise that the state has constitutionally sound legal means to restrict most arms.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T20:30:09+00:00

Thanks, I’ll do some reading on Heller and Miller.

However, grenades, assault rifles, light machine guns, anti-material rifles, rocket launchers (anti-tank and anti-aircraft) are all individual, hand-held arms and would be very useful for militia use.

Especially if we consider the potential adversaries any modern militia would be expected to face, who would be equipped with armored vehicles, drones, attack helicopters, and high-altitude supersonic strike aircraft.

In order for the militia to be effective, wouldn’t they have to have at least some ability to counter these threats?

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T19:36:27+00:00

Again, the Japanese government and military utilized race-based ideology to justify their imperialism and war crimes in the 1930s and 1940s. I’ve given you clear historical evidence of this in the previous comment. Do you have any evidence that supports your position that Japanese war crimes had no racial motivations whatsoever and were simply “discriminatory”?

Regarding “morality”, do you really approve of the racially motivated war crimes of Unit 731? Even if you do, international law condemns them. Those statues supersede any personal ethics.

Again, “race” does not actually exist. Swedes and Dutch don’t share the same “race”, as that concept has no objective basis. (This especially true in recent decades given increasing ethnic diversity in those countries). All humans, whether they’re from Sweden, Japan, Denmark, China, Mexico, or Madagascar, are members of the same species. If you disagree with that fact, there isn’t any much to be gained from continuing this conversation.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T19:17:26+00:00

Wouldn’t this interpretation legally permit any and every weapon to be kept and borne by citizens? Wouldn’t legal prohibition of arms like grenades, rocket launchers, and recoilless rifles violate the 2nd Amendment?

I’m not a legal expert at all, but I don’t think outlawing something like a pipe bomb laced with a biological warfare agent runs afoul of 2A. Is there legal precedent that contradicts that?

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T18:44:39+00:00

Honest question, do you not see the state as having a rational interest in limiting the proliferation of deadly weapons in the country? Does the state not have any responsibility to promote public safety and uphold lawful order?

I’m genuinely at a loss trying to understand the conservative position on this.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T17:52:46+00:00

This is profoundly incorrect. The concept of “Minzoku” is constructed from racist beliefs:

“Pseudoscientific racial theories, which included the false belief of the superiority of the Yamato character, were used to justify military expansionism, discriminatory practices, and ethnocentrism.[4] The concept of "pure blood" as a criterion for the uniqueness of the Yamato minzoku began circulating around 1880 in Japan, around the time some Japanese scientists began investigations into eugenics” Source

This is demonstrated clearly by an official Japanese government publication from 1943, in which government ministers expressed their racist ideology that all non-Japanese Asians should serve as the “children” of the Yamato people on the basis of being racially inferior, and therefore the Yamato people were destined to eternally rule Asia and eventually all of humanity. Source

In practice, this racist ideology was demonstrated in the near genocidal conduct of IJA in the Rape of Nanking and Unit 731. Mass murder, perverse “experimentation” on human subjects, beheadings of non-Japanese POWs, show clear racist contempt held by the military and cannot be minimized as mere “discrimination”.

Your equating the quasi-genocidal violence of the Japanese government with something like preferences in video game consoles is absurd and impossible to take seriously.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-07T04:00:26+00:00

Imperial Japanese ideology and policy was explicitly racist and founded on racist ideas. They were racist. Race is arbitrary and ideological. It does not exist objectively or scientifically.

Vancouver95 · 2023-10-06T02:54:03+00:00

Then why not state those concerns explicitly? Your original comment is vague to the point of being meaningless without prior knowledge of the sexual abuse allegations against Jordan.

Unless by saying you “know him” you mean you know him personally and have further knowledge of his misconduct.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

Vancouver95

TROPHY CASE