Ebola...

[gourimoko]

How are you getting your arms into Canada?

It's canada, you just walk into it.

This.. It's easy as hell to crossover into Canada, and they aren't going to be searching my entire vehicle even if I crossed over at a checkpoint. More likely than not though, I would crossover in the North/Northwest and not the Northeast.

And if by chance I ran into some border patrol clown that wanted to act like a hero, I'd blast him in a fucking heartbeat.. keep it moving. Again, in situations like that, different rules apply. Ethical or not.

If you have a plan for that, I'm in. And I don't need to be your sidekick.

Yeah, I feel it but no thanks.... No time for guys who can't follow my lead. In a time of crisis, that shit is dangerous. Everybody wants to do there own thing, limited resources, potential threats all around..

Ain't nobody got time for that.

I'm a lot crazier than you are. I'll live in a bush tepee if I have to.

I dunno about that bro...

Think about the fact that I already have had this planned out for most of my life, then ask yourself that question again. Remember that 3-day blackout? We were locked and loaded and ready to go.

Zombie apocalypse? Bring it the fuck on.

 

[CleveRocks]

Or you can just go to Vermont, or better yet Maine.

 

[gourimoko]

Or you can just go to Vermont, or better yet Maine.

Explain?

I get Maine, but still, there'll be Americans there predominantly. The rate of gun ownership, and likelihood of an encounter is higher in Maine, I would imagine, than in say Ontario where almost no one owns a gun, and few people own rifles for hunting.

Being armed to the teeth in Canada has several advantages, including the lack of population and the lack of armament. The downside is the lack of ammo. You'd need to take all of it with you.

 

[Jack Brickman]

So this is basically The Stand, yes?

I'm totally siding with the devil if push comes to shove.

 

[gourimoko]

So this is basically The Stand, yes?

I'm totally siding with the devil if push comes to shove.

What is the best rendition of The Stand on film? I know there are a few miniseries, a movie... which one should I watch.

 

[Jack Brickman]

What is the best rendition of The Stand on film? I know there are a few miniseries, a movie... which one should I watch.

I'm pretty sure there's only one version: the 1994 mini-series.

 

[The Oi]

The book The Stand is incredible. I can't imagine the miniseries came even close.

I've read a lot of Stephen King, and the character development in that book was the best of what I read imo.

 

[Jack Brickman]

The book The Stand is incredible. I can't imagine the miniseries came even close.

I've read a lot of Stephen King, and the character development in that book was the best of what I read imo.

It didn't, but mostly because it was a network miniseries. A book like The Stand would really have to be adapted by HBO or another major cable network to even hope to hold a candle to the novel. The 1994 one is surprisingly not terrible given they had to PG the hell out of it, but it's also pretty cheesy at times, and the fact that they really can't show a lot of what made the book so good really hurts it. It does a good job of following the general plot beats, though, and I really loved the guy they cast as Flagg.

But yeah...The Stand is in desperate need of an HBO remake. Someone needs to get the fuck on that.

Oh yeah, the 1994 series does get bonus points for casting Kareem Abdul-Jabbar as the monster shouter. :chuckles:

 

[The Oi]

I'll bet one scene they didn't show was:


***book spoiler***









was one of the early parts where the insane gung ho black soldiers had the white guys locked up in a newsroom and were calling them up on stage one by one to execute them live on television.

I thought that scene was pretty harrowing and a perfect example of the types of things people would do to one another if all of the sudden there were no rules and lunatics were allowed to do whatever they wanted.

There were some pretty intense sex scenes and severe beatdowns that I'm sure they had to PG as well that would have been pretty crucial to the story.

 

[OptimusPrime]

Yeah, I feel it but no thanks.... No time for guys who can't follow my lead. In a time of crisis, that shit is dangerous. Everybody wants to do there own thing, limited resources, potential threats all around..

Ain't nobody got time for that.

This brings up an interesting topic, but while yes there will be threats all around, and human beings can always be a threat, they (at least most) aren't irrational, and the ones that are also prepared are much less likely to be an immediate threat than the starving masses. And there are advantages to working together with other groups of prepared people in that situation. If there is going to be a gunfight to get into Canada, the more guns on your side the better. Then we can go our separate ways until the need to work together arises again, if it does. People have been conditioned to believe that people are wild animals without government structure to tame them. That isn't at all true, and while a disaster situation like that would lead to untold tragedy, people that are prepared can still be civilized.

I dunno about that bro...

Think about the fact that I already have had this planned out for most of my life, then ask yourself that question again. Remember that 3-day blackout? We were locked and loaded and ready to go.

Zombie apocalypse? Bring it the fuck on.

Ok, then you are just as crazy as I am.

 

[gourimoko]

This brings up an interesting topic, but while yes there will be threats all around, and human beings can always be a threat, they (at least most) aren't irrational, and the ones that are also prepared are much less likely to be an immediate threat than the starving masses. And there are advantages to working together with other groups of prepared people in that situation. If there is going to be a gunfight to get into Canada, the more guns on your side the better. Then we can go our separate ways until the need to work together arises again, if it does. People have been conditioned to believe that people are wild animals without government structure to tame them. That isn't at all true, and while a disaster situation like that would lead to untold tragedy, people that are prepared can still be civilized.

There is much validity to this...

But if you want to know my strategic mindset..

In the game Civilization (if you play), I rush-down... I kill everyone who COULD be a threat, long long before they ever actually are.
In real life, if I were Truman, I'd have nuked Russia and China both. Don't let others put a gun to your head before you can pull the trigger.
If I had to kill a room full of people to save my child/brother/wife/mother's life... well, that'd be one dead room of people. However, I would not do it to save my own life.

So, you can kind of see how I would approach equally capable, equally armed, neutral parties. It would be with hostility.

Ok, then you are just as crazy as I am.

I'd bet on this.. hell man, for years I thought you were actually my older brother. I hipped him to the this site and I thought you were him for a long ass time! I also thought you were black! Was shocked to find out otherwise.

 

[OptimusPrime]

There is much validity to this...

But if you want to know my strategic mindset..

In the game Civilization (if you play), I rush-down... I kill everyone who COULD be a threat, long long before they ever actually are.
In real life, if I were Truman, I'd have nuked Russia and China both. Don't let others put a gun to your head before you can pull the trigger.
If I had to kill a room full of people to save my child/brother/wife/mother's life... well, that'd be one dead room of people. However, I would not do it to save my own life.

So, you can kind of see how I would approach equally capable, equally armed, neutral parties. It would be with hostility.

I played Civilization a lot many years ago, and I understand the strategy. And I agree with your handling of it, but only if I deem the other people an immediate, hostile threat. If there is no reason to think they are looking to kill me or my group, then I just proceed cautiously and try to feel out what they want and how we can use them. But that's just me, hopefully if that happened and I came across someone with your plan, I could read that right away and handle it.

 

[Sumac13]

My approach is to not to give a shit about it.

I hope it is my destiny to be like Typhoid Mary--an asymptomatic carrier--one that would infect all of you paranoid mother fuckers. I'll be sure to piss in every fresh water lake from northern Canada down to the tip of Chile, then work my way over to Europe and Asia. I'll skip Australia. Don't want to hurt any kangaroos. Ebola Sumac, I shall be known as.

 

[gourimoko]

I played Civilization a lot many years ago, and I understand the strategy. And I agree with your handling of it, but only if I deem the other people an immediate, hostile threat. If there is no reason to think they are looking to kill me or my group, then I just proceed cautiously and try to feel out what they want and how we can use them. But that's just me, hopefully if that happened and I came across someone with your plan, I could read that right away and handle it.

This is why I make sure that there is no time to read the plan. My first moves are to build warriors/horses and just spam an attack on all my surrounding players CPU or Human... doesn't matter. I never waste a turn moving the first settler, I just plop him down immediately (unless I see a river within 1 turn). I chop trees and stifle local growth in my own 2 starting cities just to achieve this end. By turning my civ into a warrior/horse factory, I just kill everyone around me as no one has anything more than maybe 2 warriors, a settler, and a city.

To me it is more important to establish myself early on, militarily, than to do anything else - as this will give me an enormous head start. It's like coming out of the blocks in a race and holding the guys on your left and your right back while you sprint ahead.

I do this in a LOT of strategy games.. Even if the goal isn't to win, but to harm; even if it will cost me dearly, if it costs the opponent more and there is a net sum in my favor, then the strategy is sound. If I see a player is advancing culturally or scientifically near or ahead of me, I'll literally tear his civilization apart (raze cities, pillage crops, roads, improvements). I won't waste time taking him completely out of the game, but I will displace him and set him back a few dozen turns behind me.

In real life, I think my goals would be similar... Not necessarily outwardly hostile, but I would take a preemptive approach to defense; or, better put, an offensive approach to self-preservation.

 

[Kouki]

nerds