Destroy a city with a flower – a challenge

[mr_thebrain]

the package is in the mail.

[Rei]

So, you're not open to NEW challenges?

A.

When I have a major Syntax test today, two books of De doctrina christiana to read for tomorrow, a weekly project and quiz in Hebrew, two Latin declensions and a new conjugation to memorise ASAP, plus my regular duties? I'd say that it's not so much that I'm not open to a new challenge as I am busy enough to pick and choose if I feel it is a challenge worth considering.

That said, I support the giant venus flytrap in the giant flower pot.

[suminonA]

Wow, I hope all goes well for you We'll be waiting for more solutions here No pressure intended.

A.

[suminonA]

the package is in the mail.

Thanks, the check is in the mail too.

A.

[mr_thebrain]

i already said the poppy.

wars have been faught over this plant, villages gone, people killed. to make a product that if it wasn't against the law, a whole lot more people would die.

if any real plant has the ability to bring down a city it would be the poppy.

[suminonA]

Poppy. Noted.
You just need a lot more than one plant (one flower) to do any real damage.
Just sayn'.

A.

[mr_thebrain]

picky picky.

what suggestions do you have to offer? hmmm?

[suminonA]

I don't know, like an alien super-power coming to Earth in search of a specific flower, and destroying any city that doesn't have it. (An alien flower, of course).

A.

[mr_thebrain]

right, that's much more plausable than poppies or a giant venus flytrap.

[suminonA]

Well, at least the alien scenario is possible.

A.

[mr_thebrain]

*cough* poppies *cough*

[suminonA]

Gesundheit!

[Taalcon]

A government dignitary meets with the dignitary of another government for the purposes of a treaty.

As part of the widely broadcast diplomatic moves concerning the treaty, one dignitary presented a beautiful flower, native to his own country, as a symbolic gesture. The flower is placed in a specific place of honor while it lives, and a plan is made that, right before the natural decay starts in and begins to present itself visually, the flower will be subject to a method of preservation. The flower will be available, for all time, as a symbol of the unity between the two nations.

Now, nations or groups who are opposed to this treaty on some grounds will now have a completely different view of this flower.

Some may attempt to go after the actual individual flower that was gifted.

Some protestors may begin with another method, smaller in scope, by symbolically messing with the native land on which the flowers naturally grow. They are ripped up by hand in some cases. In others, flower-killer is sprayed over the land.

The patriots of that nation who are supportive of the treaty would retaliate - indivudals would be planting this flower en masse as a sign of nationalistic support. Flags, posters, banners, bumper stickers, etc bearing the image of the flower would rise all over the nation.

Terrorists would step it up a notch in retaliation. From individuals ripping up flowers, to spraying lands, to tearing down flags and burning merchandise, to burning stores that peddle the merchandise, to bombings.

In short, escalation, leading to the result of a destroyed city.

[suminonA]

Now that's more like it! I've prepared my sticker already.

Moral question: Is it OK to use a beautiful thing (e.g. the flower), that originally binds nations, to finally destroy them?

A.

[Taalcon]

For most people who intend to destroy nations, morals aren't usually even an issue.

[mr_thebrain]

oh i think morals play their part. just that some people have a twisted moral core.

i don't think using something beautiful to destroy a city is really a moral issue though. the moral aspect would be whether you should destroy the city period.

I would think that if a city was to be destroyed at all, i'd rather have it be due to something beautiful than something ugly. that way stories and poems can be written.

and taal... the method you described to us was straight up Troy. except instead of a woman, it's a flower.

[Taalcon]

and taal... the method you described to us was straight up Troy. except instead of a woman, it's a flower.

I hadn't thought of it at the time I wrote it, but you're absolutely right.

[suminonA]

Who said that women can't be as powerful as flowers? Or is it the other way around?

A.

[suminonA]

oh i think morals play their part. just that some people have a twisted moral core.

It doesn’t help a bit calling it “twisted”. By their standards yours is just as twisted (and wrong). Call it different. "Different" isn’t by definition “worse”.

i don't think using something beautiful to destroy a city is really a moral issue though. the moral aspect would be whether you should destroy the city period.

True, but we are analyzing here shades of the dark.

I would think that if a city was to be destroyed at all, i'd rather have it be due to something beautiful than something ugly. that way stories and poems can be written.

What’s so significantly “better” about having something to write about? Furthermore, “beautiful” also has “twisted” definitions.
Why are we associating “ugly” with “bad/evil/dangerous”? What do you think Frankenstein’s baby would think of that?

and taal... the method you described to us was straight up Troy. except instead of a woman, it's a flower.

Good call. Minus one point for Taalcon, for infringing Copy-right moral code.

A.

[Taalcon]

[mr_thebrain]

now you're just being silly Anonimus

[suminonA]

I'm sorry to hear - I mean to read - that.

A.

[Eaquae Legit]

Hmmm, this reminds me of something...

I don’t only have limited intelligence, but also limited originality

A.

Pot, meet kettle.

[suminonA]

Pot, meet kettle.

How do you do!

I never claimed any "originality" points, you know. And yes, Taalcon didn't claim them either, it was an "innocent" and friendly joke.
Still, you don't have to believe me if don't want to. Calling me silly is a lot easier.

A.

[suminonA]

Ok, let’s see how we’re doing with the challenge thing. So far, we have these propositions (in chronological order):

1) The “a deity is watching you and will give you a sign” scenario (suminonA)
2) A “messy coup d'état that involves feeding datura/aconite to leader”, or poisoning water sources (Rei)
3) Poppy, or the product of them (mr_thebrain)
4) With “with a GIANT venus flytrap” (Hegemon)
5) (suggestion) “an alien super-power coming to Earth …” scenario (suminonA)
6) use a flower to bind nations and then to destroy them (Taalcon)

The overall moral question is, just as mr_thebrain has noted:

the moral aspect would be whether you should destroy the city period.

So, new propositions are welcome, together with thoughts on what would justify applying any of them.

A.

[Jebus]

Hmmm, this reminds me of something...

I don’t only have limited intelligence, but also limited originality

A.

Pot, meet kettle.

I don't get it...

[suminonA]

Jebus, I made a "silly" joke about Taalcon's originality. So zeroguy reminded me that I'm no better myself. That's what the expression means.

A.

[zeroguy]

So zeroguy reminded me that I'm no better myself.

Minor, but important correction: EL did that, not me.

[suminonA]

Noted. My bad. Thanks zeroguy.

A.

[endercoaster]

I modify the poppy proposal by pointing out that a single flower holds many seeds (deep metaphor alert).

[suminonA]

:: mission start ::

- Are we ready?
- Sir, we are ready!
- Do we have the flower?
- Checked, Sir!
- Do we have the metaphor?
- Checked, Sir!
- Is it a deep one?
- Sir, the author assures us that it is!
- Great, let’s go on with it.
- Releasing the metaphor, Sir!
- Any effects?
- Sir, the habitants of the city seem not to appreciate the profoundness of the attack!
- Any side-effects?
- Sir, none whatsoever, the habitants are not dieing!
- What are you saying ?
- I’m sorry to report that the mission has failed, Sir!
- Darn, I knew I have no idea how to use that deep metaphor thing…

::mission end::

A.

PS: I meant this as a joke. Are we allowed to make jokes here?

[zeroguy]

Are we allowed to make jokes here?

No. Now you must die.

[suminonA]