Okarin

Quartett.

Playing games will consume your time, but nothing more. It's no surprise you don't enjoy them in your current situation. I know what it is to have large amounts of time in your hands with no prospect whatsoever. It's the worst sensation in the world really. No 180 degrees change will happen suddenly. You'll have to carve your way out of the gutter with tooth and nail. It will take extended effort (months, years). But for the moment just take it easy. Things will improve as long as you look at them with better eyes, but you're probably not able to, at this point. Rebuilding (a country, a life) takes patience, but we humans excel at it. You can do it. If you don't enjoy your time here at Fuwa, it's best you don't log in. In your situation avoid any conflict. You can still talk with people you trust via multiple ways. Just say the word. I think that the first step would be to let it all out talking with someone that will listen to you. You need to become free and unbound, and the first step is opening up your heart. Maybe the people you talk to won't be your best friends at any point, but right now you need them and like I said before you deserve the help (anyone does). Shit happens, what matters is the way we deal with disaster.

I find in most VNs with decent writing, you can also learn a thing or two about the world or some discipline. Like occult or psychology in Ever 17, time travel and science in Steins;Gate, and many more. I still remember how in Never 7 the characters reflect on how the April sea would be with a temperature of 2 months earlier. Really handy knowledge when going to the beach that I never reflected upon.

Man, no one can beat The End of Evangelion, period.

Fate of Atlantis is really good, if only I could manage to finish the darn game. They should have made a movie out of this, but Harrison Ford is so old yet... I have no mouth and I must scream, I really wanted to play it in the olden days, but now I've grown out of the 90s and pixel games.

At 12-13, maybe Pokémon, Beyblade, Yugioh and the like. Anime and VN: different mediums, different vibes. Of course the primary means of impact for a VN is reading.

Youtube is just one possible platform for sharing content, but of course, it's major. I don't know that much about Twitch, but maybe they could move the nasty videos over there. Large sectors of Youtube have been a drama fest between users, so it's fine that it's coming to an end. Like Rooke says, I think this measure can only improve it. Controversial videos are funny for a while, but tire afterwards.

I'm agnostic since my adolescence, I believe God's existence can go either way (not that we'll possibly ascertain it anytime soon -- that's the trick, folks!!), and every religion under the Sun can be good or bad. I of course was raised as a good Catholic and I've fiddled with Buddhist views since, but hey, these are just theories. The prophets are from so long ago. Religions should be about doing good, and you don't need religion for that. Do good because that way you will benefit yourself and your peers, and everything will work out. Also the Buddhist concept on reincarnation and the Universe being a testing ground for souls is nice, but you can't bet all the money on that. For example, you could be tempted to neglect this life you have since you are being reborn anyway. That's no good. In a sense, thinking that this life is all we have and when it's over it's over, is a nice motivational concept, contrary to what it may seem. All in all, I'd like to go to a Heaven where I can meet people such as Bud Spencer and Gene Wilder, let alone my dead pets and loved ones. That'd be awesome.

Glory! "Silver Streak" was one of my favourite movies as a child. I had no more than 5 years I think. Also, "See No Evil, Hear No Evil". Even though he was American, I will put here my favourite funeral march.

For me it certainly was that way... at 17 I used to take things a little too much to heart. If the things that mattered to me the most failed, everything shattered. I was indeed a brooding adolescent. I wanted to be the best, and a reliable person, but it was too much pressure. I was unprepared. My therapist always noted how I was a whiner and downer (she didn't say it that way, of course, but that was the truth). Then at 25, things seemed to change... I began to look at things with a brighter mentality, I suddenly experienced warm feelings, and I began to think there was indeed an order and deeper meaning in the Universe. It's sad all the time that I wasted, but those are my foundations.

Sad to hear. This may look uncaring, but doesn't everyone go through the same thing at your age? I certainly did. Nobody said growing up is easy. Seek all the help you need, you really deserve it. I give you an interesting quote: "there's no trip too remote from which you can't come back".

No one really cares about Flowers, do they?

You seem to have a deep misunderstanding of nuclear weapons. I have been saying constantly that they are the supreme disuasion weapon. But no more than that. Getting exterminated but somehow dealing some heavy damage seems stupid to me, they're still wiped out. Army men aren't suicidal. Besides, I thought that the scenario was smuggling a nuke to some terrorist. Kim Jong Un, Islamic extremists or the illuminati may seem like dangerous madmen, but if they aren't stupid they'll negotiate -or coerce- their asses out of danger. Not press the red button and see the world burn, since it would mean their surest demise. There's a good reason no nuke has been used outside of tests since WW2.

1- Didn't you assume regime collapse and chaos? If there's general chaos, an occupation from a nearby power to settle the situation can be conceivable. Oh right, I forgot the only country with rights to occupy is the USA, they call it "pacifying" or something. 2- Again mixing things up. The nuclear weapons won't suddenly be launched because there's a crisis. Nothing would be accomplished with that. Power isn't always about what you may win, but about what you may lose too. Vietnam fixed their economy because pure communism doesn't work (the same for China too). They were intelligent, unlike the brainwashed North Koreans and their tyrannical regime, and opened up to the world. The Communist Party still holds power undivided, though. Here's an example that communism can be reasonable at times.

Not like Syria. In Syria there are lots of factions, as the zone is a crucible of cultures and different peoples. Best Korea is monolithic. As far as I know the country is in the hands of the military (aside from the Kim). Should the Kim be brushed away, the military could opt for some transformation of the economy and opening up the country to the rest of the world. Like what happened in Vietnam (I already pointed out this). In short, you're comparing apples to oranges. Every country is a specific case. But if worst comes to worst, India and China should handle the situation.

Explain how the collapse would be in your view. No one is gonna overthrow those regimes from inside, they'll only give way to something else. The most possible outcome, however, is continuation of status quo. As long as you don't go storming countries. Disarming China and India is laughable. They have had nuclear potential for decades and haven't shown any trace of misconduct. And like Rooke says, they aren't truly extremist countries led by madmen. I think Chinese are very cunning. North Korea could still be a somewhat-Marxist state, but optimized (like Vietnam), or it could be an autocracy (but more moderate) like some ex-Soviet republics. Maybe the change will come naturally. There's a limit on how mad and evil people, and leaders, can be.

I'll bypass the discussion about Hitler as it isn't interesting, it was only there for the quote and the attitude it shows. You talk about UK's military... UK, that country has a saying that goes, "they have a military fit to win every last war they fought". Of course European armies aren't powerful because Europeans aren't bent on war nor geopolitics. We prefer to be left alone (even when it comes to importing videogames, we're the last ones to get the goodies). We have experienced war enough to want to get away from it, hence the creation of the European Union, to avoid another continental war. Russia and China are far better contenders. I think that if Best Korea and Pakistan's regimes fall, then all the better. Those aren't zones as unstable (and critical) as the Middle East. Arguably the fall of Saddam Hussein made the zone unstable as would the fall of Assad. In the case of the nuke regimes, the next government could only be better. I mention again the example of Kazakhstan. Why wouldn't they play Game of Thrones and smuggle their nukes to some shady organization? They didn't, they chose the sensible way. And Kazakhstan's government is not a first-rate one. There's a certain logic to power and you can't get very far bullying around.

"Strength lies not in defense but in attack" --Adolf Hitler. Those are the words of a madman and an inept leader (also militarily, granted). Bullying people and countries around isn't the only way to drive your point home. In fact, it's bound to make everybody hate you. I think you grossly overestimate the possibilities of the American military. Besides you've gone completely offtopic. The fall of the Soviet Union was far more problematic than some small cloisterous regime, and it was carried out OK. So far the human race has dealt with every crisis that's been thrown at them. There's no reason to think the trend won't continue.

Geopolitics is a delicate matter. Also Syria is a true mess and far different from the countries covered here. Like I said, (extremist) Muslims are more dangerous by a tad. While Marxism isn't a hate ideology per se, religion can be the most totalitarian of it all, like the grievous fights between Catholics and Protestant some centuries ago show. Also, how do you like it that ISIS forged off the invasion of Irak? I just hope that everything remains status quo, that's the safest bet.

"Action"... Yeah, also why not kill everyone? That way we wouldn't have to worry, about anything in fact. "How to make everyone happy? Kill those being unhappy". This looks to me like Stalinistic thinking. As in, the worst oppressor turns out to be the alleged "liberator". You could probably screw up things more by intervening than by sitting away.

The more reasonable idea is that Pakistan's and Best Korea's weapons are as heavily guarded as USA's or Russia's. As for the concept that it would benefit them if a crazy terrorist blew Los Angeles away... I don't know. There's just a handful of countries who could have facilitated the weapon. And you're forgetting intelligence, and the fact that pretty much every communications link is pinpointed and surveyed. Security is an industry going upwards.

I don't know those regimes so deeply, but from what I understand, in Best Korea, if there's no Kim there's no regime. Probably the military would be reasonable enough to seek a democratic and peaceful exit to the situation. And from what you say, the country should be in shambles. See how Admiral Doenitz promptly surrendered after the occupation of Germany? There wasn't much to hold, to begin with. If we went by your view, the fall of the Soviet Union should have been terrifying. Lucky that Russians are intelligent people. No, it should be possible to have an orderly dismantling of those regimes. At least communists are somewhat reasonable. Maybe those countries would fall under the influence of their biggest neighbours. In any case, it's no US affair.

My view on nuclear weapons as a whole is, "don't worry". No one should be so stupid as to start a nuclear war. And if they do... well, Mankind deserves it. After all, it's equally possible a meteor wipes out the majority of Mankind; it's only because we're a young race that we haven't experienced this. Maybe there's a God after all? The difference between both situations is that in one of them, humans have control. It all nails down to how stupid we really are. So, there shouldn't be any worry if there's a democratic transition in those countries and they still hold the weapons. See the case of Kazakhstan; they had some leftover weapons from the Soviet Union, and they suffered so much for the nuclear tests that they banned nuclear weaponry forever and they don't want anything to do with it. See how sometimes we people can be sensible?

By the way, I acknowledge that Pakistan is a full nuclear power (I don't know, is it? I think so). Notice how they haven't gone berserk and started to nuke places. Nuclear weapons are a tool for coercion and manipulation. They aren't meant to be launched carelessly. Even the stupidest monkey understands this. North Korea could write their name with blood in the book of History by nuking Japan, but they would have little time to be delighted. No, what the regime wants is to stay forever in power. They don't really want to blast people away, even if secretly they wish so. Because then there would be no restraints to wipe them out. North Korea's demonstrations are an empty threat, I think; it depends on how much of a stupid Kim Jong Un is.

You should point out what you think the situation will be after the "regime collapse". Most probably the weapons will stay there, untouched, like they did with the fall of the Soviet Union (that had a large arsenal and no one stole anything or went rogue a la Hunt for the Red October. Of course, you can't "steal" silo ICBMs. But no warhead ended up in terrorist hands. Although the situation is worse now). Also, said collapse implies a new government taking over, and they should handle things sensibly. In the case of North Korea, it's hard to conceive a democratic transition, since there had been so many purges and the people are so accustomed to their leader's narrative and lies. Who would take over? There's not even any opposition within the country, unlike in Cuba. There could be, but it probably is in exile. Pakistan is a case I don't know much about, but I guess a fall of the Muslim regime could mean it would fall under India's influence. I think, too, that it's a very ingrained regime and it's difficult to find any opposition. In both cases the most possible cause of regime fall would be an economic crack or serious supply shortage. But, you know, North Korea manages to pressure the UN to get what it wants all the time. Pakistan... it seems that they are strained by their opposition to India, but they are doing well at the moment. Also, as far as I know, Best Korea isn't a "nuclear nation". They have the missiles, but haven't done yet the miniaturisation of the warhead to get it in there.