Iran issues stark military warning to United States

Blacks and Jews are merely good while the Europeans are the best in the above statements.

That's like saying "Dogs are brown, cats have stripes and birds eat worms"; in other words, sometimes these are true and sometimes not. When you speak in superlatives, I'd have to say "not" more than "is".

That really didn't answer my question - do you really believe these things or do you just enjoy hyperbole?

 

Hey there, D28guy! Mike, is it? I don't believe I've seen you around before.

What has any of that got to do with my question of how Ps104_33 defines "coward"? It's not even a coherent sentence.

Oddly, as much as I object to Ps104_33's refering to Iranians as "sand crabs", I agree with your characterization of the Taliban as "satanic cockroaches".

Ok.

You may think so, Mike, but I don't. I also don't think we're stupid enough to believe that all Middle Easterners share a single culture, speak the same language, have the same religion, etc, etc, etc, either - but some people like to pretend otherwise for their own purpose - which is to make them seem less than human.

Then again, some people just might really believe it. I'm not going to assume any one is that way unless they convince me of it.

 

Daisy,

Hello to you! I've been around for a good while, but I guess we've never crossed computer paths before.

Maybe I misuderstood your comments, but there are many, in their sad state of confusion, who actually think we are the evil ones in these military conflicts were enter into. Of course thats not the case. We are the "good guys", and everyone should have the good sense to understand that.

For many, their objectivity is dulled due to being in a "pity party" because most Americans had the good sense to reject Gore and Kerry in favor of President Bush.

In their unhealthy loathing of our president they are led to post some of the silliest nonsense imaginable and they actually think it makes sense.

I may have taken something you said the wrong way. If so I apologize. But I thought you said something about the United States of America being the ones who are looking for human beings to exterminate, rather than seeking to liberate them from those monsters who engage in such things.

Sometimes I can "jump the gun" I guess.

Mike

 

I don't think we are evil, most of us, and I don't think most the ones we combat are evil, either. I think going to war against Afghanistan because the Taliban government helped bin Laden carry out the 9-11 attack was justified. However, the "pre-emptive" strike against Iraq was not.

Now that we are there, having destroyed the civil order and opened the country to foreign terrorists and local gangsters, we are obliged to restore order and rebuild. It isn't easy and I admire the troops who can gain the trust and cooperation of the local people. I hope our civilian command will listen and back up the guys on the ground there who know what is going on in their particular areas.

Everyone should have the good sense to understand that it is not all black and white, good vs evil. In many ways, we are the bad guys; in other ways we are good.

Bush will probably make history as the worst president ever.

Obviously we have read different posts as way too many of the silliest ones I've seen have been by those who cannot bring themselves to admit what an abject disaster this president has been.

You did misunderstand. My comment was directed at individuals who seek to dehumanize those they consider to be the enemy so as to ease their consciences that thousands upon thousands of innocent people were killed and maimed, or may soon be killed and maimed, because we didn't like their government which, ironically, they didn't like either.

There are other ways of accomplishing the same thing at a much lesser cost.

I'm not so sure that you did, but when you attack my positions please do not attack me personally, and you ought to get the details right. When you disagree with me, and you obviously will, you'll be more convincing if you address the specific points and not go off on "Kerry" and "Gore" tangents which have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

In fact, I think you'll do better by explaining why you believe what you do than by trying to convince me that I'm wrong when you don't fully understand what it is that I do believe (sometimes I don't know myself). I'd also find it interesting to discover what we do agree on.

 

No - that's college basketball, right?

That young star athletes are lavishly rewarded while talented mathematicians, physicists and poets pay their own way.

Only so far as foolishness is wrong.

Yeah, it saves a person from having to think.

On the positive side, a stereotype may serve as a point of reference in understanding - how much is this person or these people like the stereotype and how much different and what accounts for the similarities and variations.

That really didn't answer my question - do you really believe these things or do you just enjoy hyperbole? I don't know you well enough to tell when you're serious and when you're playing.

 

I don't think this is a threat to be taken lightly. They aren't nearly as stupid as some would like to think.

I would suspect that these statements were aimed at the Iranian people to evoke nationlism and to Muslims worldwide to create unity against the US and west.

That said, his threat is serious. The Iranians probably have missiles that can hit our troops in Iraq. The probably have the ability to produced a dirty nuke or chemical weapons already.

Daisy alluded to the de-humanizing of the Iranians. Well, in reality, that is exactly what they are doing to us and Israel. The effort against Israel is calculated and to this point not popularly opposed in muslim nations. You would have thought that the denial of the Holocaust would have brought howls from "moderate" Muslims... If there have been any complaints, they've been muted.

You have to ask yourself: What is this guy doing specifically... as in his end aim? And also, how do you respond so that he can't get it?

 

That young star athletes are lavishly rewarded while talented mathematicians, physicists and poets pay their own way.

</font>[/QUOTE]There is really no need to be PC stupid when faced with incontrovertible, statistical FACT that for whatever reason blacks are on average faster and quicker than whites.

This is a serious issue that serious, scientifically motivated physiologists have been studying for years.

Here are some possibilities: http://www.science.smith.edu/exer_sci/ESS200/Raceh/Price2.htm

The sociology argument isn't a very good explanation since even black kids from well to do or firmly middle class upbringings demonstrate similar superiority.

 

BTW, did anyone else notice that Daisy took offense at the suggestion that blacks might have genetic predisposition to superior athleticism... but what did she ascribe their success to?

The base elements in human nature of consumption and greed! Blacks become athletes because they lack the higher motives that cause someone to place value on things that aren't necessarily rewarding in terms of base cravings.

Her answer has far worse racial overtones than the contention that there are scientifically recognizable differences in black physiology.

 

So Scott J, is your robe washed and ready for the next cross burning? This is the most racist garbage I think I have ever read.

 

I've seen silly blanket statements before, but this is in the running for silliest ever.

Every Iraqi who dared to oppose the Baathist regime was taking his life into his own hands. They were not "innate cowards." The same is true in other countries, such as Egypt and Syria (within the past few weeks). And if you strap a bomb on your back and explode it, you may be a lot of things, but a coward is not one of them. </font>[/QUOTE]I don't know if cowardice is the right term but they seem to think in a different manner.

I had an Iranian woman tell me two years ago that most people in Iran hate the mullahs and wanted freedom. I asked why they didn't unite and take a stand. The answer was "fear".

 

What in the world are you talking about?

There is absolutely nothing more racist about saying that blacks on average run faster because on average they have longer achilles tendons than there is in saying that red heads are on average more susceptible to sun burn and skin cancer due to generally being light skinned.

There are physical differences between blacks in general and whites in general. It is utterly stupid to call the recognition of that fact 'racism'.

 

And let me guess....some of your best friends are black. Sheesh!

 

As a matter of fact, yes... and they aren't so stupid as to deny that there are physical differences in general between whites and blacks.

It is a completely benign concept.

 

MP you might want to re-read my post. I wasn't detailing a position. I was analyzing the direct implications of what Daisy said were possible reasons that blacks were more inclined to athletics.

After re-reading the post, I can see how you might have misconstrued it.

 

The comments after the rhetorical question of what Daisy ascribed the difference to are the implications of what she said... not an opinion being promoted by me.

Specifically she said: "That young star athletes are lavishly rewarded while talented mathematicians, physicists and poets pay their own way."

 

Scott,

If I misread you, my apologies.

In any case, I don't discount that there are racial, gender, and other minor physiological differences among groups of people. However, some of these smack of stereotypical biases, and come off sounding horrible.

MP