A concession stand! :3

So, rumors continue to fly about regarding fleet starbases.  So, I thought we might want to put together a wish list of features that we all might like on a Stonewall Fleet Starbase.

To start things off, I would like to see a version of Club 47 as a socialization area.  

It would also be cool for any NPC's in the base to be automatically wearing the Stonewall Fleet Uniform. 

What does anyone else think?  

I've been waiting for the French tech tree to go live before I re-started, myself.

This game went live on April 12. I've been playing it, (and Rift), in recent weeks. I'm on the NA server as "Seras_Victoria". Still a very fun game, and very high production values for a free2play.

May 9th 10pm est/7pm pst.

Please post the position you would like to fill. Details on event to come.

Captain:
First officer:
Chief of Operations/Second Officer:
Chief of Security/Tactical Officer:
Chief Science Officer:
Chief Medical Officer:
Cheif Engineer:

Security personnel:
Science station:
Medical Personal:
Counselor:
Engineer:
Helmsman:
Bartender/Chef:
Crewmen:

Episode 265 - The Next Generation - "Dark Page" - 11/01/1993

A psychic breakdown puts Lwaxana Troi in a coma, and Deanna works to save her life. Features a young Kirsten Dunst, playing the little girl Hedril.

Enjoy!

Sorry if I misread that...although I do find that they are being a bit ridiculous about the whole thing. Did they actually expect him to surrender? The President said that they were actually tried to capture but there was no chance to...which is quite "logical". If he has been hiding for so long, he is not just going to come out and say "FINE! I give up...now I count and you hide."

The biggest problem with terrorism is that they can't be taken as prisoners as they have no value or regard to their own lives. They will commit suicide to take someone else with them. Bin Laden was no ordinary criminal, he was an enemy of many, and a commander if anything. I know the lines might seem blurry, and I do agree someone associated with them should be sent to jail, but how do you catch someone who is ready to die?

""Actions taken by states in combating terrorism, especially in high profile cases, set precedents for the way in which the right to life will be treated in future instances."

How can we treat someone with the "right to life", when they are ready to die to kill? It makes no sense...for the average Joe, maybe, but not for someone who is told that by killing others you're granted heaven!

I remember reading that Vulcans make the best tactical.

I read a really good BBC news story that touched on several points including the one we are discussing here.

If anyone is really interested in this topic you should check it out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13318372

I find it really interesting watching the world's reaction to this event as more information surfaces about what and how things happened.

P.S.: Andy, I never said anyone declared war on Pakistan. I said the USA/NATO/UN did not declare war or authorize military action on or in Pakistan. ;)

To anyone currently in the TOR Beta, Any update on when they will be letting more people in? Or a schedule of beta phases? I'm curious about how they are running the testing process.

Episode 264 - The Next Generation - "Phantasms" - 10/25/1993

Data experiences strange dreams, while the Enterprise has issues with its new Warp-core. But all is not as it seems.

Enjoy!

NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! The web site has been suspended!!!!!!!!!! No more free star trek and i was loads into ds9!!!!!!!!!!! Is there another site!

2 for today.

filled it out.

Quote by Rickster

I think it's great the Bin Laden has finally been dealt with.

But, I a little surprised no one has touched upon another pretty significant issue that arose from this successful raid.

I'm a little concerned that the United States essentially invaded a sovereign nation (Pakistan) to conduct a military operation without that nations consent.

I find that concept a little disturbing.

Granted the operation was probably successful because of it's secrecy... But does that give the USA the right to do this in any country they want without their consent?

http://www.inewsone.com/2011/05/05/if-sovereignty-is-breached-us-ties-will-be-reviewed-kayani/48471

Food for thought...

The idea behind a sneak attack is you tell no one. I guess they know that thee are many leaks in other countries staff so better to take the slamming than not but \i beleive they did know but rather than put pakistan under threat they decided to make a scene of it. They will reduce it down a bit but look at the stats I bet it drops down to what it was a few months ago. Its a ruse to make sure pakistan does get reprisal attacks upon it. If they werre realy pissed they would says hey america get out.

Quote by Rickster

True enough... But the USA, or NATO, nor the UN declared war on Pakistan. Or did I miss something here?

I know Bin Laden deserved it... But...

If someone in some other part of the world considered George W. Bush a war monger would it be okay for another country to invade the USA in a small military operation to kill him with out the USA's consent?

And with the Hitler example that was mentioned, there was a formal declaration of war before German sovereignty was violated. And your right... that action was certainly was justified.

I think there is a HUGE difference. George W. Bush wasn't the brightest of Presidents and most people knew/agreed with it. But still, he didn't throw airplanes at civilian locations or bombed the underground or Piccadilly Circus. He didn't gas people, or again, killed civilians. I think if someone is such a huge security issue worldwide, then yes, anyone should do whatever they could to put the guy down. No one will feel safe otherwise. If you say "Oh please, I don't care don't come into my country...ask, even if to kill a big threat." Aren't you defending a criminal? Of even a tyrant?

I see what you mean, a leader could be annoyed. But I think I'd be more annoyed with myself for not having caught the guy earlier or with my own troops.

I was checking online to see the war against Pakistan you mentioned but couldn't find anything...do you mean Lybia? Because that's a whole different issue to do with civilians being used as targets by their leader...

lol it's ok :)

thanks for organizing the pageant

that was fun

True enough... But the USA, or NATO, nor the UN declared war on Pakistan. Or did I miss something here?

I know Bin Laden deserved it... But...

If someone in some other part of the world considered George W. Bush a war monger would it be okay for another country to invade the USA in a small military operation to kill him with out the USA's consent?

And with the Hitler example that was mentioned, there was a formal declaration of war before German sovereignty was violated. And your right... that action was certainly was justified.

Exactly my point with a bit of irony...

Right or not, I wouldn't endorse any country protecting a terrorist/criminal. Why do we have the UN again?

I didn't read the article, but I'll try and read it once I'm up...but I think as much as the ethical question you brought up, we need to think of how long Bin Laden has been in Pakistan?
Should we just wait for another attack while Pakistan can't do much?

Didn't England and the allies invade Germany to take out Hitler? Again, was that wrong? I know they're not quite the same, but they were both criminals in some way...

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'd hate it if another country came in a killed the international terrorist that I was protecting.

I mean, god, ruuude!