News Stories

[Claies]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

i"d prefer madrid or rio de janeiro, those locals are really lovely, and really asia has gotten quite a couple of wins from the olympics commitee the past two decades so europe or sa actually would be a nice change, because you can't really just forget nagano was a decade ago.

Well...Asia has only had three Summer Olympic games and two Winter Olympic games. Ever. Only three of them in the past two decades. In that same timeframe, we had Yugoslavia (1984), France (1992), Spain (1992), Norway (1994), Greece (2004), Italy (2006), and in the future, the UK (2012), and Russia (2014). I support Rio de Janeiro because South America's only had one before, and I'd like to see their way of doing things.

Of course, there's also worrying over how bribed the IOC is with the selection. I wouldn't be surprised if Chicago and Tokyo have done a bunch already.

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

Pick and Choose, pick and choose. You avoid the whole entire point of my argument. Islam restricts women to be subservient to men which is not true, yet radicals continue to enact violence against women who seek to become educated. A religion that says that women are nothing more than servants to men is flawed because innocent people are still being butchered over what most of the DEVELOPED world considers fact that men and women are equal in mental capacity, and it is not genetic that men are superior to women.

I would have continued the discussion just to give you a different perspective, a perspective your ex-President lacked, but, currently I am at a loss. Just a friendly reminder though, there is life outside the Texas ranch.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

Pick and Choose, pick and choose. You avoid the whole entire point of my argument. Islam restricts women to be subservient to men which is not true, yet radicals continue to enact violence against women who seek to become educated. A religion that says that women are nothing more than servants to men is flawed because innocent people are still being butchered over what most of the DEVELOPED world considers fact that men and women are equal in mental capacity, and it is not genetic that men are superior to women.

I think you're mixing dysfunctional tribal/clan custom with religion a bit as well. You can tailor any of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions and their hundreds of variant sects to assert women should be property of men and that mistreatment is okay. Misogynists use snippets of religious scripture to "rationalize" (using the word loosely) their absymal treatment of women.
These jerks treat women badly because they're insecure and unable to manage their own impulses and thoughts. Admitting that and changing it would require maturity they don't seem to possess.

[yezhanquan]

Vexx nailed the tribal/clan part. Many so-called "Islamic" rules are really tribal/clan traditions, with some even predating the arrival of Islam. Since we have little records of these tribes and clans in pre-Islamic times, it is too easy at times to just chalk everything up to "Islam".

[Claies]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

Vexx nailed the tribal/clan part. Many so-called "Islamic" rules are really tribal/clan traditions, with some even predating the arrival of Islam. Since we have little records of these tribes and clans in pre-Islamic times, it is too easy at times to just chalk everything up to "Islam".

I do also believe it's cultural, and not much better than the witch doctors in Africa spreading around how having sex with virgins will cure you of AIDS. The traditions we speak of here only replaces "AIDS" with "family pride" and "having sex with virgins" with "killing freedom-loving women". It'll take at least one more generation for the moderate, better educated people to fully replace them, so feel free to ask this question again in 30 years, assuming the idiots in that region (I don't care which country they come from, including the US) aren't blowing up each other's civilian infrastructure.


Got bored, started replying to threads farther back in history.

Originally Posted by Vexx

The trick is to have a sufficient number but no more than that. With the new weapons, if we could get everyone down to a few hundred that would be enormous -- saving money, maintenance, potential for accidents, items vanishing, etc ...

Estimates (culled from wiki on Bulletin of Atomic Scientists):
United States 4,075 / 5,535
Russia (former Soviet Union) 5,200 / 8,800
United Kingdom 160
France <350
China 160-400
India 100-140
Pakistan ~60
North Korea 0-10
Israel 100-200 (based on warhead material)

Originally Posted by The Cardinal of the Kremlin, by Tom Clancy (when he was good at it)

Jack extended his hand toward the man, pointing his index finger like the barrel of a gun. "Let's say I have a pistol pointed at your chest right now. Call it a nine-millimeter Browning. That has a thirteen-round clip. I agree to remove seven rounds from the clip, but I still have a loaded gun, with six rounds, pointed at your chest -- do you feel any safer now?" Ryan smiled, keeping his "gun" out.

"Personally, I wouldn't. That's what we're talking about here. If both sides reduce their inventories by half, that still leaves five thousand warheads that can hit our country. Think about how big that number is. All this agreement does is to reduce the overkill. The difference between five thousand and ten thousand only affects how far the rubble flies. If we start talking about reducing the number to one thousand warheads on either side, then maybe I'll start thinking we're on to something."

[Shadow Kira01]

WOW!!

The Soviets had 8800 atomic scientists back then, that's like more than twice the number of current American atomic scientists. Where did they all went??

If I am not incorrect, I believe the majority of the Soviet scientists had gone over to China, while the remaining ones were recruited by India, as well as other nations.

When it comes to scientists, all they care about is the fundings... They don't care about politics or religions or whatever, the higher salary, the higher the chances they will work for them.

[Nosauz]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

Vexx nailed the tribal/clan part. Many so-called "Islamic" rules are really tribal/clan traditions, with some even predating the arrival of Islam. Since we have little records of these tribes and clans in pre-Islamic times, it is too easy at times to just chalk everything up to "Islam".

Doesnt change the fact that in Iran women can't get divorced from men, because shiria law doesn't recognize the complaints that women bring against their husbands.

@Flipskuul get out of your delillusional world, I'm a democrat I didn't vote for bush, I went door to door for gore as middle schooler and sat heart breakingly infront of the tv when he lost the election. And with my legal age to vote came, I vote for obama and not mccain. But hey lets just make blanket statements, cuz clearly i'm a gun toting, handle bar mustached, blood boiling american, who lives on a ranch in texas, who wants to kill some commies. You know what every american only lives on the ranch in texas. Because hey thats what we americans do... Stereotype us like a small minority of our extremists stereotype islamic militants, great I see how your arguement is civil and an attempt to foster debate. Just name one islamic country that actually gives power to the people, you'll find that actually very few support it, freedom that is. Just look at UAE, dubai is a city built by people who are not allowed to leave and continuously used for labor against their will, sounds like good ole freedom to me.

Just figure out that Americans value freedom over everything, we faught against those that stand for tyranny, and I'm proud that the greatest generation defeated one of the most reviled, if not the most reviled men in history. Also we defeated the japanese who treated humans as less than livestock so I chaulk that up as +1 to america's stance on freedom, how has an islamic regime done anything for freedom? No.

@Claise, don't froget them Catholics, Pope say's condoms don't stop the spread of aids, guess he's never heard of indonesia, and this coming for the guy who still lets his clergy state that the holocaust did not happen, and excommunicate a girl and her family and doctors who gave her an abortion because her step dad raped her and if she delivered the baby she may have possibly died because she's nine.

[LeoXiao]

how has an islamic regime done anything for freedom? No.

Back in the day, when Muslims controlled all of the Middle East and North Africa, their empire was known for being very civilized for the time, and it tolerated Christians and Jews.

People give America too much credit for being way more awesome than anyone else. We're not saints, we're just a nation of immigrants who happened to move to an entire unused continent with tons of good land, resources, and oceans all around to protect it.

[Claies]

Originally Posted by Nosauz

Just figure out that Americans value freedom over everything, we faught against those that stand for tyranny, and I'm proud that the greatest generation defeated one of the most reviled, if not the most reviled men in history. Also we defeated the japanese who treated humans as less than livestock so I chaulk that up as +1 to america's stance on freedom, how has an islamic regime done anything for freedom? No.

People value freedom as long as it gets them the money. Why did you think all these expats went to Dubai?

Said greatest generation allowed our government to watch, inspect, and spy on us, as well as invade countries that we probably shouldn't, all in the name of anti-terrorism. I do not disagree that America is so far still a good symbol of freedom, but you're heavily exaggerating. The US didn't defeat the Japanese because they treated humans as less than livestock (which they did), it's because Japan royally pissed them off by bombing Pearl Harbor before formally declaring war. The US didn't invade because Saddam's a royal jerk, but because (officially) they thought there were nuclear weapons (and there wasn't).

All I'm saying is please put down that overwhelming patriotism and speak with logic. I'm on your side, but you're not making sense.

[Whiteshirt]

Well for a start, Iran probably wouldn't be the Islamic theocracy it is today if we didn't remove Mohammed Mosaddeq in the 1950s to fuel our desire for oil.

But hey it was worth it since he was a dirty left wing bastard as we all know all communists are evil.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Shadow Minato

WOW!!

The Soviets had 8800 atomic scientists back then, that's like more than twice the number of current American atomic scientists. Where did they all went??

If I am not incorrect, I believe the majority of the Soviet scientists had gone over to China, while the remaining ones were recruited by India, as well as other nations.

When it comes to scientists, all they care about is the fundings... They don't care about politics or religions or whatever, the higher salary, the higher the chances they will work for them.

What???? No, wait - you misunderstood.

Those numbers are the number of ICBMs or other nuclear-tipped missiles each country possesses at the present time, not the number of scientists at any time. The missile counts simply came from the BoAS via the NRDC.

The numbers of WARHEADS are even higher since the US and the Russian missiles are MIRVed (multiple warheads that deploy to their own personal targets at the height of the main vehicle flight). A single B-52 bomber is a launch platform for up to 20 cruise missiles (nuclear ALCM/SRAM) plus a variety of gravity nukes -- all at once. A given B-52 can utterly destroy a geographically small country long before it even crosses its border.

That assessment doesn't even counts tactical nukes... (devices fired from artillery, tanks, etc that measure in "mere" tens of kilotons and are "clean" -- little radiation). As a reference, the Hiroshima bomb was a tactical "dirty" nuke by today's measurement -- "only" 13 kilotons ot TNT equivalent and used against mostly wooden structures and their unfortunate occupants. :P

And sorry but what you say is pretty insulting and inaccurate about scientists... most of them will not work against their own country unless their own country appalls them. They usually believe in what they're doing.

[Claies]

Originally Posted by Vexx

What???? No, wait - you misunderstood.

Those numbers are the number of ICBMs or other nuclear-tipped missiles each country possesses at the present time, not the number of scientists at any time. The missile counts simply came from the BoAS via the NRDC.

The numbers of WARHEADS are even higher since the US and the Russian missiles are MIRVed (multiple warheads that deploy to their own personal targets at the height of the main vehicle flight). A single B-52 bomber is a launch platform for up to 20 cruise missiles (nuclear ALCM/SRAM) plus a variety of gravity nukes -- all at once. A given B-52 can utterly destroy a geographically small country long before it even crosses its border.

I don't think that assessment even counts tactical nukes...

No, dude, we totally sign treaties to "dismantle" and "eliminate" our nuclear scientists. By the thousands. All that while North Korea and Iran are trying so hard to teach just one single egghead.

[Hage-bai]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Back in the day, when Muslims controlled all of the Middle East and North Africa, their empire was known for being very civilized for the time, and it tolerated Christians and Jews.

People give America too much credit for being way more awesome than anyone else. We're not saints, we're just a nation of immigrants who happened to move to an entire unused continent with tons of good land, resources, and oceans all around to protect it.

They were tolerated because they paid jizya. In return getting right of religious practice and protection. It was a tax on non-muslims and was probably higher than Zakat. Not a bad system, but it all falls apart when people see other cultures where this cultural freedom is free of taxation. Hence, a conflict of ideologies and the start of strife.

Its funny how a news report on the corrupt UNHRC and their war on opposing ideologies turned into a blame the western world session in order to excuse the thought process behind the UNHRC's thinking. Simply put, the western world's actions raised enough bad feelings that people took vindictive action and consistently put a certain religion/political ideology in a bad light. True, but the blame also falls on said people who have voted for those who practice political style islam, support such vindictive reaction and who refuse to evolve what essentially in some applications is a ultra- socially conservative political ideology. Those who are trying to focus on the western worlds actions are grossly missing the point. This religious/political ideology needs change. It takes an outsider; an opposing ideology to point that out, but an insider to actually force the change. Apparently the leaders of the countries in the UNHRC are not interested. Who can blame them? They have the "western mingling" card so its all good.

[LeoXiao]

They need an outsider to change? Hmm... then what was it that caused people in Western Europe to abandon radical Christianity?

[Hage-bai]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

They need an outsider to change? Hmm... then what was it that caused people in Western Europe to abandon radical Christianity?

No you misread. You sometimes need an outsider to point out your faults. This works both ways. For western culture and those in political islam. The change is internally introduced.

[ZephyrLeanne]

Originally Posted by Claies

Well...Asia has only had three Summer Olympic games and two Winter Olympic games. Ever. Only three of them in the past two decades. In that same timeframe, we had Yugoslavia (1984), France (1992), Spain (1992), Norway (1994), Greece (2004), Italy (2006), and in the future, the UK (2012), and Russia (2014). I support Rio de Janeiro because South America's only had one before, and I'd like to see their way of doing things.

Of course, there's also worrying over how bribed the IOC is with the selection. I wouldn't be surprised if Chicago and Tokyo have done a bunch already.

I still think RdJ is the best. Go on my fellow Japanese people, you can bash me because I'm disillusioned with Tokyo to start with. I've never liked Tokyo's system and how in Japan, they usually claim superiority over all else, they usually have a mindset that Kansai-ben is for ruffians and everyone else is just backwards. I cannot stand this thing, really. So, Tokyo, you really should forget about it, instead of padding ministers' pockets and spending like mad in Tokyo on oddball projects and shafting away other regions. Especially with Japan in a 20-year long recession.

Go my RdJ friends. Show them you can beat the rest, like Singapore beat Russia for the Youth Olympics.

[Nosauz]

History has shown us that tolerance and freedom "toting" brings prosperity because people are able to devote their full attention to thinking about the world in a critical sense, their able to invest all their time with out the fear they might say something that will get them killed. Just take a look at the moors, one of the greatest civilizations of spain, far more advanced then those of europe at the time, and way more innovation was going on. Also when you look at the inquisition in spain, there virtually no literature, no innovations to help daily life, because people were afraid for their lives. Of course I exaggerated, and hell many senators in america had actually bought into Nazi propaganda, but the fact of the matter is, our founding fathers fought to defend the freedoms of its citizens, albiet citizen was defined as white males, but gradually the notion of freedom, brought about change, and the fact that the government is okay with its citizens having their own will makes it the great country we are to day. Becase you know what, we have come a long way since the days of the colonial life, and the revolution, hell we fought wars because of slavery, we spend a decade mired in vietnam to combat the threat of communism. Does it mean America is the shining force for freedom, no its far from it, but instilled in the common American is the notion that freedom is what seperates us from undeveloped nations and dictatorships.

If you do take a critical look at states that have imposed Sharia as the form of law, women are treated as second class citizens, much like when women suffrage had not come to America but scientifically speaking nothing says men are superior to women, only that we are different in our intended function. Basically comparing grapefruit to oranges, still citrus but different. The fact of the matter is Flipskuul never actually address any of the points I bring up, but really America is one the better examples of a country that protects freedom. Even though America has invested in porpping up regimes during the cold war doesn't change the fact that the men behind the idea thought if the world had fallen into the soviet's hands we would not be able live as we did.

I'll just say this even though I've focused on Islam in most of my posts, I really think most organized religion has some inherent flaws in it because they are written by men, and men are inherently flawed. Just look at Israel, they continue their aggressive campaign in palestine, and you know what its barbaric, to treat other humans like that, innocent children just written off as collateral damage. They claim that its for their survival but really Israel's aggresive stance toward muslims in general is scary. The paranoia shows you what the oppressive fear can do, the whole region has been destabilized and you get the high causulties of not insurgents/ or militia, but of young children who are just trying to survive. I'll just state my view and thats injustice and tyranny should not be tolerated at any level this also includes state sponsered monoplies, governments, and just in general bigotry. Even if my government does act on everything I still feel that most of these ideas are embodied in its creating as a nation of patriots, and freedom loving men and women.

[yezhanquan]

The US is lucky in the sense that it began as a country with relatively little historical baggage. Many other countries are not so lucky. (except Singapore. We have VERY little historical baggage as well.)

Freedom can never be absolute. That would be anarchy. The trick would be to allow freedom without anarchy to set in. That level is different for every society and every country. As a person, I am pro-US. But, I can understand why some do not trust the US and her intentions.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

The US is lucky in the sense that it began as a country with relatively little historical baggage. Many other countries are not so lucky. (except Singapore. We have VERY little historical baggage as well.)

Freedom can never be absolute. That would be anarchy. The trick would be to allow freedom without anarchy to set in. That level is different for every society and every country. As a person, I am pro-US. But, I can understand why some do not trust the US and her intentions.

The reason why US is pretty much pro-freedom is because it started out as a colony. The Spanish, French, English and some others were fighting over the land. Not only that were those who were born on that land wanted to be free of a need to choose a side, the slaves too in the American Civil War and the American Revolutionary War.

I remembered a U.S Army General once said, "Freedom comes at a price, and the US Marines paid for you half of it." I think it is pretty much true considering that freedom is often paid by the death of millions.

[yezhanquan]

Let's be fair here. In the history of warfare, the US has traditionally suffered the least casualties. The European powers bore the brunt of WWI, China and the Soviet Union for WWII.