Yeah. More than once I think. It was a long ass time ago, but I remember the end involves you leaving the mansion, amid happy-ish music and a bright sunny day, and being picked up by your driver who ends up being this undead skeleton dude or something.

The game I'm really enjoying right now is Prey (2017). OMG so good. I saw some let's plays of it and initially it felt underwhelming, but the game is so immersive and non-linear, with a great story and evolving game world... It's not so much a horror game, but it has tension and some jump-scares here and there. I feel like it's got some gameplay similarities to Alone in the Dark 1, oddly enough, despite being completely and entirely different.

There's a pretty big gap between dumb as a sack of hammers nonsense like Big Bang and 2.5 men (both created by the same guy, I think) and something like It's Always Sunny or Breaking Bad.

I'm not saying you're wrong to dislike Breading Bad or It's Always Sunny (I thought BB was great, but It's Always Sunny never really grabbed me), just that they're not really in the same category.

It's just kinda like saying "I don't really like pop music. I don't like Lady Gaga; she's like Katy Perry or Pink Floyd. And I tried to get into Led Zeppelin, but the first album sucked".

I've never watched it, and find it really surprising that it's been on for over 10 years now. Over that time period, I've had a good number of friends and acquaintances ask me, "Do you know The Big Bang Theory?" I've always answered, "Yes, I'm aware of it," usually followed by my wondering if they're some kind of "Young Earther." With this sift I've now realized it's a sitcom. And it's just going into a long queue of "must-see" TV shows, like Two-and-a-Half Men, Always Sunny in BlaBla, etc. Somebody pushed me to watch Breaking Bad, but after just a few episodes...and Jesse the Idiot not dead yet...I had to quit. What a Gilligan! I guess I'll just go back to reading, and wait for Rick and Morty...and maybe, just maybe, they'll finally make a movie of Deadwood.

Some people seem to think this was a false flag operation (the supposed chemical attack and the reasoning behind the US response)
Apparently its a very complicated sunni -shia - iran - saudi- yemen situation about an oil pipeline that will cut russia out of the loop. They also say Trump is more concerned about drawing attention away from his Russian treason and recklessly provoking the russians for his own domestic survival. A total all round shit show in other words.

Your video, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia Rum Ham and Riot Juice, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I love the last (non-commercial) line. Such a sunny disposition on this guy.

I have this fear that someday the ants will emerge from hiding all around the world and hunt me down for my experiences as a child experimenting with my very first magnifying glass on sunny days.

Every time Kaitlin Olson has a clever idea in It's Always Sunny.

Yeah, but even within religions people can't agree on the rules.

Within Christianity, you have catholics, protestants, baptists, pentecostals, eastern orthodox, evangelicals and god knows what else. All of whom disagree on various aspects of their religion (sometimes fairly major points).

Islam is the same (shia, sunni, etc).

There isn't one single religious text that is the definitive version.

And I grew up in catholic Ireland. Everyone went to church, everyone believed in god (hell, it was in the constitution) and even public schools actively participated in religious rituals.
You would find it incredibly difficult to argue these people weren't religious.

Yet, they ignored large parts of their religion from the minor (dietary restrictions, etc) to the major (sex outside marriage, contraception).

I never met a single person who thought the penalty for apostasy should be death. I still haven't.

Sorry, but @slickhead is right about this point. That's a No True Scotsman fallacy.

I think your environment was the exception rather than the rule.

Got to love the country singer's straw man about Hitler and Japan and ignoring the fundamental issue of US policy in the Middle East and acting to protect oil interests over letting them self rule and work out whatever issues they have to work out. I understand the need to try and contain the fallout from the wars between the various Islamic factions (mostly Shia and Sunni) from spilling over to neighboring nations, but the US policy has been overt in serving US interests over the long term interests of the region since the 50's. The US solid backing of Israel, even in cases where it is clearly in the wrong, adds fuel to the fire.

And I know those on the right complain how Obama has backed away from Israel, though the evidence clearly differs as the US still refuses to tell Israel, to the degree we should, to treat people within its occupied zones with proper respect... and the fact so many Americans feel the need to protect Israel and favor Israel over its occupied territories no matter what, again adds fuel to the fire and shows those in Islam how under attack their faith is, which makes them stronger in their faith and more sure that they are on the right path, since the devil is working harder to put their faith down than any other faith... of course I hear this exact same argument from Christians all the time, how the devil is trying to put Christianity down proves that Christianity must be true... amazing how a little empathy would probably help world peace, but neither faith seems to have any... though I've seen enough FB memes about how Christians are so depressed because they have so much empathy and I wonder where it is, as I've yet to see any empathy from Christians as a whole. All of which digresses from the original point...

US foreign policy is directly responsible for the rise of ISIS/ISIL, whatever you want to call it... now ISIS has risen itself up to be a rather large threat via its actions, which are deliberately provoking, as it's easier to radicalize people when the world starts turning against Islam as a whole, as those on the Right are apt to do, than turn against the small segment that aren't peace loving. Of course the Right's preferred response to those provocations are to do exactly what ISIS has publicly stated they want. They want a large war against them, they'd love it if Republicans banned them from coming to the US as it would make lone wolf attacks in the US by US citizens more prevalent, which like they did with Miami (the shooter himself pledged allegiance to ISIS, but he also pledged allegiance to Hezbollah, which is fighting against ISIS)... Republican policies, especially those of Trump and Cruz are so on point with ISIS desires, one has to wonder if they themselves are tied with ISIS interests, or if they are tied to military interests that profit off continuing the war and sacrificing American lives in the name of war profiteering... but Republican Jesus said "Blessed are the warmongers and the war profiteers and cursed be the peace makers"... It was there on the Sermon on the Mount when he also said, "Blessed be the rich employer who pays his employees poorly, and cursed be those employees who are poor and needy and needing assistance. Surely I say unto you, if you give tax breaks unto the rich and cut benefits for the needy and the poor, I shall bless your Nation... oh and forget the sick and dying, they got themselves into their mess, they are responsible for getting out, only the well to do shall have healthcare." Again I digress though...

For starters, I have to oppose the implied thought that Saddam's reign of terror was preventing this sectarian violence. His rule through the Suni minority to wage genocides against the Kurdish and Shia majority and decades of brutal repression of same all served to make the sectarian hatred and violence worse. Tally up the hundreds of thousands he killed through genocide, the million plus he killed in the Iran-Iraq war and everyone that died by direct execution or deliberate starvation level poverty and compare it doesn't stand out as starkly and objectively a desirable alternative to today.

Now if you ask what would I do differently it depends on what level of power I've got to act with. Ideally, we can go back to first Iraq war and have Bush senior march on Baghdad. This would've aborted one of Saddam's genocides. Equally importantly, this would have kept the Shia Iraqi population's view of America as a liberating force. The standing in the desert and watching Saddam slaughter them thing still carried their mistrust of American forces after Saddam's actual removal later. That singularly stupid move of leaving Saddam in power, at the urging of most of the planet, drove the Shia population of Iraq back to Iran as their sole sympathetic ally.

Next step, after the removal of Saddam, whether we can do it back then, or only a few years ago as it really happened is to truly setup an occupation government. You don't bring stability to a region by immediately trying to transition to a democracy before the shooting has even stopped. The occupation government would be run by somebody with actual knowledge and experience with Iraq, rather than as Bush senior did by sending in a guy with zero experience and a two week lead to brief himself. The task you should place on this leader, is to setup a federated Iraq, with distinct and autonomous Shia, Sunni and Kurdish states. The occupation government would dictate things after taking input from Iraqi's rather than holding them to the tyranny of the majority as Bush and co allowed. The occupation would setup an initial constitution defining what laws and agreements spanned all three Iraqi provinces/states and what extent of autonomy they had to define their own systems of government. The American military's job would be to enforce this very basic constitutional framework. Each Iraqi state/province would be aided in setting up their own governments with a transition plan again dictated not voted upon. The transition plan would define the point in time when each state transitioned from occupation rule to a self determined future and rule of law.

The above plan on the whole would work, but Bush and co couldn't have managed post Saddam Iraq more poorly if they had actively tried to.

If zero time travel is allowed and we are to 'fix' things today, you need a lot MORE power. You need an army the size of America or Russia's and the political will to spend several years doing things the public will hate you for. The end game is still the same as above, a federated Iraq kicked off under a dictatorial occupation. To get there from today though you need to create stability. You need to take an army and march it across the entire country. As each city is cleared of militants you take a census of everybody and keep it because you need it to track down future militants. In entirely hostile locations like were ISIS has full rule, you bomb them into the stone ages before marching the army in. The surviving population is given full medical treatment. Now, as for sorting militants from civilians though, you do NOT use American style innocent until proven guilty justice. Instead, any fighting age males are considered guilty until proven innocent. This level of rule of law needs to remain in place until stability can be restored. You of course guarantee lots of innocent arrests, but your trying to prevent massive numbers of innocent deaths so it's required. As you stabilize the nation you can relax back to innocent until proven guilty and work on re-integrating the convicted.

You'll note that although the methods I'd declare necessary above are by any count 'brutal', they do not extend into Saddam's usage of genocide, torture and rape as the weapons of choice.

TV Sitcom, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia , this is a parody of their opening.

I've only seen one episode, where they all get addicted to crack. I can see why people like it, it's well done. Just not particularly funny to me.

Your video, It's Always Sunny in Europe, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

"The conflict between the Shiite and Sunni is something that people had generally not anticipated."...that is except for any person who looked into the history of the region. I recall many people warning against exactly this before we went in.