Tony

Well, they don't suffer fools gladly. Neither do I. My best friends are one, a Kansas Jew, the other a Turkish Jew.

I actually think Krav Maga is a great system for average fuddy duddy folks, who don't have great strength, flexibility, and not willing to devote hours of training every week.

I used to converse with Charlie Rose forum(now defunct), moderator, who is an Israrel-Canadian. She observed the same about Russian Jews. I'll have to disagree with you also. Jewish bullys that I've met tend to be Russian Jews and/or descent. (I do notice their last names, you know.) My experience with Russian immigrants were very positive in general. I think the irony is that Russian Jews after having faced undeserved (in objective sense) persecution for so long, philosophically "gave in", and adopted the mentality of their persecutors. Kinda "Stockholm Syndrome".

Great use of the term. Personally, I think most bullies qualify as "Beta-bully". Most of them are basically nothing more than "Jackals" with human appearance, philosophically flimsy, unable to think and stand up for oneself, basically desperately seeking peer approval to make themselves feel better than they really are by making others look worse. Now, "Alpha-bully", they are very rare, personally I've never met one in person. I think simple isolation would work better for "Beta-bully" than "Alpha-bully". I think only way to cure an "Alpha-bully" is to be throughly honest with him about humanity,(another word, tell him humanity for now aren't that great, but can be improved and ask for his help in improving them) and give him the opportunity to use his positives for productive purpose. I fully sympathize with your desire. I am simply more interested in fixing the situation that allow/encourage bullying on certain people than reacting to it(and possibly worsening the symptom). Btw. Most bullys I've met were Koreans, Chinese, Mexicans, Jews(but never Israelis, for some reason, I got along a lot better with Israelis than American Jews.), Blacks. Not that many whites bullys. Good for you that your bully was not an "Alpha-bully". Your solution would not likely have worked with an "Alpha-bully". "Alpha-bullies" tend to regard corporal punishment as nothing more than confirmation that "his way of looking at the world" is fundamentally correct, (that if one has the monopoly in coercive force, one has the "right" to do whatever one wants,), and regard those who oppose him nothing more than "tests", not a source of fear. Just imagine, if just half of the Jews had been like you, Holocaust could not have happend.

Not bad. Great. I disagree on this one. I think it's important to isolate them and helped them to think for themselves and find out what is productive on their own. Why do you think giving the impression that bullies are well treated has anything to do with helping them to find what's productive behavior on their own? You know what, I guess this is where I might have some common grounds with Ba'al. I asked this question because for some reason, most people cannot advocate opposing majority under any circumstances. ...and I hope they know the reason why they chose to use force and recognize that it's in their best overall interest and win everytime.

Red: You do realize that I am being satirical ...yes Of course, I do. I just wanted to see if you have the fortitude unlike some others. You do. Now you know why I got banned in so many political forums.

You mean, for the right price, everyone's a whore?

Who's going to decide who is the bully? ...and if the alleged bully was not the bully? What should be the consequence for those who alleged an innocent kid to be the bully? Do you think it's a good idea to gather anti-semitic bullies in one place? Okay, so you propose to gather anti-semitic bullies in one place and to build rapport with each other and expect them to be no more anti-semitic bullies when they get out? What if it's the majority that engage in bullying?

I don't know, corporal punishment didn't do me much good, in fact, it affected me negatively that if one has the monopoly in coercive force, one can do whatever one wants to do (even when it's ultimately self-destructive) so long as one has the force to back it up. What good did the corporal punishment do for young Stalin? I think one solution would be, isolate the bully kids one by one for an extended period of time, and create a condition so that they can learn to think for themselves, what's ultimately productive behavior, on their own.

I kinda agree. As an autodidact, my education improved by leaps and bounds.

Phil, actually, the South was more for free-trade than the North. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_1828 .Is that why U.S. military has aided the Soviets during WW2?

Phil, who decide(s) what is just? Who decide(s) what is legit? So do you think U.S. should give the land back? If not, then why not? Who decide(s) the property rights? If it's in their[those who want to steal it from you] overall interest, and they have the coercive power to take it from you with acceptable costs (as they perceive), why do you think they shouldn't? So do I. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpwfbTNtb8Q ...and "Casablanca". is no, "Once upon a time in America".

Ed, who decide(s) what is moral?

It's My Life by Bon Jovi This ain't a song for the brokenhearted No silent prayer for the faith departed And I ain't gonna be just a face in the crowd You're gonna hear my voice when I shout it out loud It's my life It's now or never I ain't gonna live forever I just wanna live while I'm alive (It's my life) My heart is like an open highway Like Frankie said, "I did it my way" I just wanna live while I'm alive 'Cause it's my life This is for the ones who stood their ground For Tommy and Gina who never backed down Tomorrow's getting harder, make no mistake Luck ain't even lucky, gotta make your own breaks It's my life And it's now or never I ain't gonna live forever I just wanna live while I'm alive (It's my life) My heart is like an open highway Like Frankie said, "I did it my way" I just wanna live while I'm alive 'Cause it's my life You better stand tall When they're calling you out Don't bend, don't break Baby, don't back down It's my life It's now or never 'Cause I ain't gonna live forever I just wanna live while I'm alive (It's my life) My heart is like an open highway Like Frankie said, "I did it my way" I just wanna live while I'm alive (It's my life) And it's now or never I ain't gonna live forever I just wanna live while I'm alive (It's my life) My heart is like an open highway Like Frankie said, "I did it my way" I just wanna live while I'm alive 'Cause it's my life!

Hey, for the right price, everyone's a whore.

Well said. Indeed, I think about the only time in the classical period matched that kind of coordination was Macedonians under the Alexander the Great. Maybe Byzantines? Jeffrey, please correct me if you think I'm wrong on this.

I'm sorry, I thought you asked which two presidents were responsible for winning the pacific war. I didn't think you meant, "responsible" for causing the war. Then, there's only one I hold responsible for, FDR. I don't think it's fair to hold Theodore, Taft, or Pierce responsible. What Theodore did was using Japan as our "pawn" to keep the geopolitical balance in Asia. During those times, the main potential enemy of U.S. was not Japan, it was Euro-colonials and Tsarist Russia (later the Soviets). War Plan, "Orange" was originally conceived, assuming Euro-Colonials as the opponents of U.S. You can read, "The tradegy of Great Power Politics" by John Mersheimer.

I read it from Reader's digest article in late 70's. Well, it's an effect, the cause is more of weight is closer to the body, so it's far less of a strain for arms/shoulder/chest/neck/head to move and steady the rifle. High fire rate also has much to do with it. German MP40's has very low cyclic rate, which contributed to easy control of the weapon. Well, Soviets had a different doctrine, they even formed an entire sniper platoon for "force multiplier effect", using semi-autos. It's so easy, I didn't even think of it as a question. Truman, and FDR.

Aug uses conventional ejection system, but this creates a problem when shooting around corner from the left side. This actually could be an advantage, when shooting in confined space, such as, narrow hallway, or trench, inside a car. This give the shooter some breathing space before the shells start bouncing around, (besides far less likely to bounce around compared to conventional ejection system), some of them getting inside your cloth. This was one of the complaints of the soldiers who used submachineguns during WW1, those hot cases getting inside one's uniform, burning flesh. Also, empty shell casing ejecting upward is one of the signs enemies look for snipers. This is one of the reasons why some Top snipers prefer bolt instead of semi, this way they minimize exposure to the enemy. But, yes, if I shoot upward at a steep angle, this would worry me, since forward ejection system rely partially on gravity to eject the empty cases. Still, I think it's a worthy trade-off, considering how much faster handling the rifle becomes with bullpup configuration. . Can you elaborate what kind of disadvantages this would entail?

Yes, that's it! Since it's very difficult and expensive to own a full-auto, if it's semi, one may as well get full power round. Bullpups are very fast handling, ideal for cqb, the only weak points are shooting around the corner, and bad triggers, but Kel-tec seem to have solved those.

He did, but I think he was inferior to Yamashita. I think the best general on U.S. side was Curtis Lemay. Without the nukes, do you think FDR would have had the support of U.S. public to invade Japan?

Thank you, but most moderators at most political forums didn't appreciate my style, especially when directed at their "pets" or "flunkies' aka "gophers", "water carriers", "Me, too's", "Fellow Pile-on's". A "professinal autodidact", and managing my investments. Judo, Juijutsu, Aikido, Motobu style Karate, Xyingui style swordmanship Pistols, Shotgun, Bullpup style battle rifle

I am intrigued, can you tell me which Taliban warlords are under the UN banner? I just checked long war journal. I was incorrect. It is former Mujahadeen leaders that are working with us and NATO. ...and I salute to your philosophical fortitude.

I think MacArthur is somewhat overrated. He's a media-savy general, a real ladder climber, and a prima donna. I think air power is sometime a little overrated. Yes, it is the most important by far, but one can have air dominance and still lose the war or at least a battle. Did you know Musso had air superiority over the Greeks during the disaster at Greece? Allies had air dominance during the operation Winter Storm launched by German-Italians, still the Axis managed to win the battle due to savy use of terrain.

Hadn't it been always the case? This didn't necessarily weaken Rome, in fact when the politicians and the generals were the same people, Rome became the superpower and overcame both massive babarian invasions, and Hannibal, plus other patriotic citizen militias. It was the nub of the corruption problem. Roman politicans-soldiers make their fortunes by, to put it rather bluntly, looting conquered provinces. So it was not the fact that the politicians and the generals were the same people was the problem, but it was the fact that generals were allowed to loot the conquered provinces for their own private gain at the detriment of the state? Would it necessarily have been or be a bad thing? What about the war against the Natives? Again the problem would be the potential for corruption. Jeffrey, the potential for corruption exists so long as we have politicians. Even though we don't have politicians becoming generals and back and forth, we still have corruptions. Look at all those democracies, they don't have Roman style general/politicians, still they can have massive corruption. Early Republican Rome had politicians becoming generals and back and forth, so why didn't they have the problem later Republican and certain periods of Imperial Rome had? Wasn't it the disaster at Teutonberg forest that put a stop to expansion? - Red No. It merely proved that in the northwest, the Rhine was the natural boundary for the Empire. So the disaster at Teutonberg forest proved the Rhine was the natural boundary for the Empire? So the disaster at Teutonberg forest put a stop to expansion of the Empire? Jeffery, do you see any profound difference between the two above questions? So that was the real problem, not the fact that the politicians and generals were the same people? It merely made the problem greater. In fact, the decision about who would wield power in the Roman political entity was often the direct result of the use of military force from the time of Marius on, so one can say "the army decided" starting with him. Jeffrey, Politician/generals had existed long before Marius, why did they not create the problem to the extent their successors would later in Late Republican Rome and certain periods in Imperial Rome? Rome always had a garrison assigned to protect Rome, how come this hadn't caused the political problem during the early Republican Rome to the extent it caused during certain period of the late Republican Rome and the sucession problem for certain time periods of the Imperial period? The garrison was much smaller and sometimes nonexistent; the army was composed of Roman citizens and not a professional group which (in the ranks and among the NCOs at least) regarded military service as a lifelong career; and most important, there was not one specific unit dedicated to garrison status: various legions or portions of legions served as current conditions required. Jeffrey S. So it was not the fact that Rome had an army or general/politicans that caused the problem, it was the fact that she had a permanent (more or less) professional garrison that was large enough to defy the rest of the army and was stationed at the center of political power that caused the problem?