Tony
-
Posts
82 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Store
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Tony
-
-
Here's a link to a Krav Maga school in NYC which is a school of self-defense used by Israeli's. I've seen this on the discovery channel, and its main characteristic seem to be that it is intent on being practical...no fancy pants waving your arms or legs around like Jackie Chan (whose movies I like btw). People in Florida should be able to find the same thing so if somebody tries to kick you you can kick right back.
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 will say that I hear from many secular Jews that are my friends that Russian Jews that come to America are just about the most obnoxious folks they ever encountered.
I used to converse with Charlie Rose forum(now defunct), moderator, who is an Israrel-Canadian. She observed the same about Russian Jews.
I explain that it is more the Russian culture coming through, but they disagree.
Adam
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".
-
Did not think that through well enough. Isolation would be particularly effective for the "Alpha-bullly" vs. the "Beta-bully," if I can use those terms.
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.
As to #4, I think that was more my ego and my desire to punish the bully.
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.
I dislike bullies one hundred percent. I can still remember the first one I had to confront at the age of five-ish (5). I even remember his first and last name. Confronting him and hitting him was a reasonably formative decision making process for me. I was scared, but I "intuitively" knew that what I was doing what was right for me as a person, an entity.
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.
As to #5. It works, but it opens yourself up to legal issues. However, I prefer taking the action and the consequences.
As to my kids, the example I tried to set, was that avoiding a physical confrontation was the first option. If given no choice, take the other party out as quickly as possible. Never draw a gun unless you fully intend to use it, without hesitation. Also, judo or tai chi is essential training. Remember at all times that this is not a movie or a TV show, it is life...very, very real.
Objectively speaking! lol
Good discussion.
Adam
Just imagine, if just half of the Jews had been like you, Holocaust could not have happend.
-
Red:
1) A decision making body, wherein the accused bully shall have a hearing/trial. The accused can choose to be represented or defend themselves.
The accused should have a choice of a bench of jury trial/hearing;
Not bad.
2) A decision making body would charge the student with swearing falsely and be subject to number 1 above;
Great.
3) Yes, as to any group of bullies, anti Semitic, pro Semitic, anti xyz, pro xyz;
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.
4) Yes, you must be under the impression that the bullies would be treated well;
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?
5) As to the majority...then you deal with Ba'al's solution.
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.
Choice is yours. My kids always had the option to respond with force if they chose to.
Adam
...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.
-
You mean, for the right price, everyone's a whore?
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.
-
Is that why U.S. military has aided the Soviets during WW2?
Yeah, but dat one was different because...well because...we want it to be different...see!
Adam
You mean, for the right price, everyone's a whore?
-
Gentlemen:
Step one:
Find out if the individual person is a bully, male, female, or gender de jour;
Who's going to decide who is the bully?
Second step:
During this determination, the alleged bully should be in a segregated set of classes that are clearly segregated so that the other students can understand that they can achieve protection.
...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?
Third:
If the bully is determined to be a bully, the following will occur:
A formal expulsion conducted in front of the entire school even if it takes several assembly gatherings to achieve it.
The bully will be removed by large men and women, preferably ex military, in shackles and cuffs, hooded is optional.
The bully will then be brought to a school which will have a secure campus, metal detectors, fences, moats, electronics, etc.
The bully will reside at the school.
Do you think it's a good idea to gather anti-semitic bullies in one place?
The bully will be provided with an education or trade.
Upon graduation, their will be a probationary period and then they are on their own.
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?
Moreover, it potentially provides safety and a clear cut decision to stop bullying at its source...the bully.
Adam
What if it's the majority that engage in bullying?
-
Corporal punishment in the schools might be a good idea, or at least the notion of it. It kept me in check as a kid when I saw a paddle on the desk.
~ Shane
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.
-
If the school districts (and their taxes) were abolished, and their facilities were sold off to teachers who aspire to a role beyond that of mere prison guards, I could even let the admins and other such civil-"service" grafters keep the proceeds. We'd still be better off. The sooner the racket falls apart, the better the chances for sanity and education to return.
I kinda agree. As an autodidact, my education improved by leaps and bounds.
-
--in the Civil War, to free the slaves and dismantle the feudalistic rule of the authoritarian, anti-capitalist Southern white elites.
Phil, actually, the South was more for free-trade than the North.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_1828
.But you cannot disagree with the fact that the U.S. military has fought against the worst people and worst regimes. Consistently. Particularly the totalitarians
Is that why U.S. military has aided the Soviets during WW2?
-
Subject: Disagreement on Avatar; Wider Esthetic Issues
More importantly, the movie -correctly- showed the injustice of killing people so you can seize valuable resources.
Phil, who decide(s) what is just?
While the American hunter-gatherers could not legitimately claim the entire continent to follow the buffalo, they could claim some preserves.
Who decide(s) what is legit?
One of the worst American Presidents was Andrew Jackson, who simply stole the Southern farming lands of the Cherokees. And in defiance of the Supreme Court.
So do you think U.S. should give the land back? If not, then why not?
It's an issue of property rights.
Who decide(s) the property rights?
They don't just belong to the highest-valued use. If you claim that my hunting ranch is not as 'civilized' a use as farming or mining or building a cpu chip factory, you still don't get to steal it from me.
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?
Rand loved the music of "The Internationale" - she did it in that case.
So do I. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpwfbTNtb8Q
No, "Avatar" is hardly "Casablanca".
...and "Casablanca". is no, "Once upon a time in America".
-
Savage myth
In Avatar Cameron perpetuates the enduring, seductive, yet morally false myth of a Garden of Eden or lost paradise inhabited by noble savages. This myth has done no end of harm to humanity. In modern times, it found its voice in Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
In the eighteenth century the Enlightenment had dragged Europe out of the Dark Ages, setting individual happiness as a legitimate moral goal, showing that the human mind could understand the movements of the planets and the biology of the human body, and discovering ways to produce the material means for prosperity. Then Rousseau stood before human progress and shouted, "Stop!"
This, of course, is moral nonsense. A look at primitive peoples from the prehistoric to the original inhabitants of America to the odd jungle tribe today shows brutality, superstition that leads to ostracism and murder, and institutionalized human sacrifice along with the occasional "respect" for animal spirits. And, in fact, virtue consists in disciplining our appetites and urges, in the light of reason, toward our individual well-being, which will also lead us to respect our fellows and deal with them based on mutual consent.
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!
-
Red:
"The United States, along with its NATO and Afghan allies, is trying to "reintegrate" militants like Wahab, offering them jobs on the assumption that they would rather earn a salary than spend their days fighting. The effort is a central pillar of the Obama administration's Afghan war strategy.
Taliban leaders scoff at that notion, saying their loyalists are waging a determined holy war against the infidel armies of the West and can't be bought off.
Interviews with Wahab and other fighters who recently left the Taliban as part of an Afghan government effort to lure them from the battlefield suggest that in many cases, U.S. policymakers may be on to something. Several ex-fighters said they joined the Taliban not out of religious zealotry but for far more mundane reasons: anger at the government in Kabul, revenge for losing a government job, pressure from family or tribe members -- or simply because they were broke."
Adam
Hey, for the right price, everyone's a whore.
-
Air superiority is one of the most important tools for setting up the battlefield to be played by our rules. It is not, however, the deciding factor (I agree). Air dominance denies the enemy access to airspace, severly limiting their maneuvering, intel gathering and logistics support, while providing us access to the same. However, most engagements are decided on the ground...door to door.
Well said.
The approach to war these days is more joint because of the strengths each service brings.
~ Shane
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.
-
Which two Presidents do we have to thank for WWII Pacific version. By the way Iwo Jima was this week. Seven thousand American casualties and twenty two thousand Japanese casualties in thirty seven days.
Gettysburg sadly makes Iwo not as shocking as it was. Supposedly, it was the first time that FDR physically blanched at the casualties.
Adam
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.
-
Red:
Hmm, was not aware of the shell casings and causing burnt skin, but it would make sense.
I read it from Reader's digest article in late 70's.
I noticed that the bull pup seemed to be very "smooth" in its muzzle movement.
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.
I known that the "famous" Thompson sub machine gun is a mother to maintain on an even line as it pulls radically upward and to the left because of the side ejection and recoil dynamics.
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.
As to the sniper comment, completely agree. Bolt action. Since sniping is basically a "one shot at a time" skill set.
Well, Soviets had a different doctrine, they even formed an entire sniper platoon for "force multiplier effect", using semi-autos.
No guess on which two (2) Presidents are responsible for the Japanese and WW II?
Adam
It's so easy, I didn't even think of it as a question. Truman, and FDR.
-
I do not like that forward ejection system.
Looks real quirky.
Aug uses conventional ejection system, but this creates a problem when shooting around corner from the left side.
One of the ejected shells paused a good 2-3 seconds.
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.
.
Additionally, if you are in cover formation, you seem to be walking across your own shells while looking downrange.
Adam
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.
-
I think MacArthur was a politically and socially savvy general. Additionally, he was willing like many to take risks like Inchon. He also, if memory serves me correctly had some damn good staff.
He did, but I think he was inferior to Yamashita. I think the best general on U.S. side was Curtis Lemay.
Which two Presidents do we have to thank for WWII Pacific version. By the way Iwo Jima was this week. Seven thousand American casualties and twenty two thousand Japanese casualties in thirty seven days.
Gettysburg sadly makes Iwo not as shocking as it was. Supposedly, it was the first time that FDR physically blanched at the casualties.
Adam
Without the nukes, do you think FDR would have had the support of U.S. public to invade Japan?
-
Red:
You have a fascinating locution [style of discourse].
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".
What do you do for a living?
A "professinal autodidact", and managing my investments.
Also, which martial art(s).
Judo, Juijutsu, Aikido, Motobu style Karate, Xyingui style swordmanship
Also, what kinds of firearms interest you?
Adam
Pistols, Shotgun, Bullpup style battle rifle
-
Some Taliban are working under the UN banner. This is a warlord dominated society.
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.
-
MacArthur did not believe they would invade because they would destroy them with air and slaughter their army if in moved towards Pyongyang.
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.
-
Which makes his analogy a little too overly "nuanced", because the problem with the Roman Empire (and the Republic before it) was that the Roman military was, at the high levels, part of the corruption problem.
The nub of the problem was that under the Roman Republic, the politicians and the generals were the same people.
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?
In America, we have a tradition of retired military running for office, but in the Roman Republic it went much further. Think of Newt Gingrich leaving his position as Speaker of the House and instead of going into private life, taking up the command of an army ready to invade a potential new piece of territory after he had arranged for Congress to declare war on some pretext. Gen. Gingrich's aims were to increase his own political clout by conquering new territory and to increase his own personal fortune through his portion of the loot and ransoms to be gained by his army as it pillaged its way through enemy lands; and then Gen. Gingrich would return home to make a run for Senator or President.
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.
The American system at least has the virtue of ensuring that the soldiers can not directly enter politics until after they leave the military.
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?
The army in general stopped invading new territory; one reason was the early Emperors didn't want to give possible rivals a chance at generating their own power base.
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?
In the result political vacuum, the army decided who would be emperor. (It had already done so in the case of Claudius, but now it became the permanent base of power.
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?
But through it all, the ultimate power was the army, and the key part of the army, because it was based in Rome and therefore was physically on the scene, was the Praetorian Guard, which never really went to war: it was the simply the most prestigious division of the army, assigned to guard Rome and the Emperor.
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?
Florida - Kick a Jew Day!
in News
Posted
Well, they don't suffer fools gladly.
Neither do I.
My best friends are one, a Kansas Jew, the other a Turkish Jew.