Nickelodeon (ended 2008)
| isabelwhatx wrote: |
| Azula bends LIGHTENING. That's the ultimate manipulation of fire. |
| Dark_soul89 wrote: | ||
she creates fire, Zuko can redirect it, Zuko can manipulate it she can only create it |
| isabelwhatx wrote: |
| I would like to ask you to refrain from using derogatory terms such as "idiot". |
| Dark_soul89 wrote: | ||
and I would like you two to not dismiss my proof for absolutely no reason and then go on to giving proof that isn't proof |
| isabelwhatx wrote: | ||||
We dismissed your proof and backed our proof up with facts, unlike yours which you back up with opinions. |
| Dark_soul89 wrote: | ||||||
|
We use pictures from the show, logic, and reason. All you have to use is insults, and repetition
| rgc19 wrote: | ||||||||
Yeah but that's a very archaic way of looking at it, in my opinion. Standards for fair fighting in war exist now. Surely you recall the devastation caused by mustard and nerve gas in WWI. Even the Nazis, who, to put it lightly, cared little for international approval, didn't use gas in WWII. Even in a world at stakes war, neither side resorted to gas (though some other illicit tactics were employed). My main point is, efficiency in combat should be separate from merit. We shouldn't judge something just by its effectiveness. You could say that's idealistic, and that war is a pragmatist's game, but certain limits exist, and something, I would call it our humanity, bounds us to adhere to them. |
Holding back from using weapons in war has nothing to do with ethics, and everything to do with pragmatism. You don't use those weapons, because if you do use them, then you know that the other guy will use them too. It's all about keeping the fight from escalating.
Don't get me wrong, I think war, and fighting in general are terrible. But when it gets to the stage where you are willing to declare war, willing to go oout and do your best to kill the other guys, then you do whatever it takes to end the fight quickly. But you do it in a smart way. You don't do it in a way that's just going to end in a Pyrrhic victory.
| isabelwhatx wrote: | ||||
Azula, I'm sure, can redirect lightening. In fact, redirecting lightening is fairly easy. You just let it pass through your body. At least, it's easy compared to making lightening. You have to seperate energies to make lightening. |
| gilvatar wrote: | ||||||
|
| isabelwhatx wrote: | ||||||||
That's true, I'll give you that |
| rgc19 wrote: |
| Hell, here's a good example. YOu're walking through the halls of your high school and a fight breaks out. Two kids start swinging fists and a crowd forms around them. You don't know either of the kids, so you don't have a rooting interest. It's mostly dodging and no one seems to land anything. Suddenly the voice of an administrator call out from across the hall, imploring the kids to stop. The one kid puts down his fists and turns away. As he does so, the other offers a parting shot, knocking the other kid down. He wins. It's cheap, but effective. Do you respect that? IF you eliminate your pro Azula bias, I think you'll see this situation clearly. |
That's not a good example at all. In that example, the fight is already over. The kid taking the cheep shot is starting it up again (and finishing it very quickly). Very different to pulling off dirty tactics in the middle of a fight where not employing those tactics means that you're probably going to lose, badly.
And this has nothing to do with being pro-Azula. As a student of history with a keen interest in historical figures such as Julius Caesar, Genghis Khan, Hannibal Barca, and Shi Huang Di (all of whom, incidently, were masters of the art of winning impossible battles through trickery), I take this stand in all such arguments. If it's an argument about what you do when you have won the fight, then that's a different story alltogether. But when the fight is still going, and especially if you are losing in the fight, then I advocate a "do-whatever-it-takes" approach.
| gilvatar wrote: | ||||||||||
|
Oh, we're not fighting with anybody We're just tearing Domme_soul's increasingly weak arguments to shreds, to the point where he has apparently abandoned the argument
