BF2S Forums " The Jester "

Yeah, unfortunately, he may end up in prison.

mikkel wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Yeah, unfortunately, he may end up in prison.

There's nothing unfortunate about a malicious vigilante ending up in prison. He seems like a fairly unsympathetic person.

meh

if he's on our (my) side, then it's cool goodluck to him and all. though the problem with people like him is that they can turn on you/ become a headache quickly.

'Jester' is a good guy.  He did what the US gov't should have done.  I tip my hat to him.

mikkel wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

mikkel wrote:

There's nothing unfortunate about a malicious vigilante ending up in prison. He seems like a fairly unsympathetic person.

I'm willing to support a malicious vigilante if the people he's fighting are even more malicious.

That statement has pretty broad implications.

It does.  It's a slippery slope.  However, sometimes that slope must be approached.

We've done a bit of that in foreign policy with mixed results.  Saddam is one of the more notable examples, but if we had to do it all over again, I'm not sure if we'd do it any differently.

If anything, vigilantes and dictators are the sort of allies you have to keep on a short leash.  Once they cease to be useful, you usually have to get rid of them.

He leaked the names of a bunch of different Iraqi informants who are now probably going to be killed.  If he's on your side, then gtfo.

11 Bravo wrote:

i would like wikileaks to actually release the shit they have on banks.

Yeah, wonderful idea. Destroy a major corporation and put thousands of people on unemployment. Fantastic.

11 Bravo wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

i would like wikileaks to actually release the shit they have on banks.

Yeah, wonderful idea. Destroy a major corporation and put thousands of people on unemployment. Fantastic.

oh ok ya instead let immoral crooks continue to get rich.  FANTASTIC

They're not crooks, they're just... uh... creative about how they get their money!

JohnG@lt wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

i would like wikileaks to actually release the shit they have on banks.

Yeah, wonderful idea. Destroy a major corporation and put thousands of people on unemployment. Fantastic.

It depends on what the corporation did.  Because people didn't find out just how corrupt Enron was in time, they nearly destroyed the economy.

In Enron's case, I would rather have seen every single employee of Enron lose their job than have allowed them to insinuate themselves into so many outside parties and damage the economy to the extent that they did.

Sometimes, destroying a corporation is preferable to letting it get away with the level of corruption that is being hidden.

I would rather have seen Bank of America truly go under than have them last long enough to suck up a massive bailout.  The same goes for AIG.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-12-03 23:41:01)

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

i would like wikileaks to actually release the shit they have on banks.

Yeah, wonderful idea. Destroy a major corporation and put thousands of people on unemployment. Fantastic.

It depends on what the corporation did.  Because people didn't find out just how corrupt Enron was in time, they nearly destroyed the economy.

In Enron's case, I would rather have seen every single employee of Enron lose their job than have allowed them to insinuate themselves into so many outside parties and damage the economy to the extent that they did.

Sometimes, destroying a corporation is preferable to letting it get away with the level of corruption that is being hidden.

I would rather have seen Bank of America truly go under than have them last long enough to suck up a massive bailout.  The same goes for AIG.

It's got nothing to do with bailouts and everything to do with laying bare business practices, operational information etc. Their competitors would parse through the data and rip the company to shreds.

And every employee of Enron did lose their jobs. The management should've been sent to jail, the copy boy on the 3rd floor did nothing wrong. Mass punishment goes completely against everything our Justice System stands for.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-12-04 06:02:23)

DST, not flame war.

11 Bravo wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

oh ok ya instead let immoral crooks continue to get rich.  FANTASTIC

Hey, I know you're not very bright so I'll spell it out for you... You wouldn't just knock out the CEO, you'd knock out all the working stiffs down to the lowliest bank teller as well. Stick it to those evil corporations though. Moron.

fuck yourself cunt it wouldnt be every bank you stupid twat.  man you think you are so smart yet most people here think you are a giant douche.

Even one bank is one too many. What would be the purpose? Create yet more unemployed people when unemployment is still sitting over 9%? Here's what will happen: the competitors will drive the bank into bankruptcy and/or there will be a run on the bank as people try to remove their deposits in a frenzy. If scenario A occurs, thousands of people will lose their jobs and the assets of the bank will simply be gobbled up by the people that put them under. You've now enriched their competitors while removing competition. If scenario B occurs, the federal government will have to step in to shore up the FDIC, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in the process. In either case, it's you who will ultimately lose, not the bigwig CEO you envy so much. He'll get a golden parachute and continue living in his mansion while you continue following whatever fad your pea sized brain leads you to. You have no right to peek into the inner workings of a bank simply to satisfy some ridiculous hatred you possess. You believe in government regulation, well, that's what they get paid to do.

11 Bravo wrote:

so i should care that some tellers loose their jobs versus the millions of jobs lost caused by the banks actions?  no thanks.

The banks caused the collapse? Could've fooled me. I thought it was the millions of Americans that were living well beyond their means with catastrophic levels of debt.