"To all of the men and women of the United States armed forces now hin the Middle East, the peace of a troubled world and the hopes of an oppressed people now depend on you.
That trust is well placed.
The enemies you confront will come to know your skill and bravery. The people you liberate will witness the honorable and decent spirit of the American military." George W Bush
Originally posted by princeoforangeHe's reasonably intelligent like Adam Sandler is reasonably funny and Chesty Morgan is reasonably saggy. In fact, if he was any more reasonably intelligent he'd be the mean median of a middling mode of middle IQ presidents.
In that case he must have BIG feet. You need to be reasonably intelligent to be the head of state of ANY country.
Originally posted by AmauroteIs that analogous to an Angry halfway point of a broad spectrum frequency of zero deviation intellectually quagmired reprobates?
He's reasonably intelligent like Adam Sandler is reasonably funny and Chesty Morgan is reasonably saggy. In fact, if he was any more reasonably intelligent he'd be the mean median of a middling mode of middle IQ presidents.
1 edit
Originally posted by kmax87We can't. Not at this point in societal evolution, anyway. War, by its very definition, is savagery. We simply employ various rules and principles, agreed upon by multiple nations, which make it seem less brutal and morally justifiable in a general sense. Eventually someone breaks those rules, and that is human nature.
The question then if war inevitably turns good people into savages then how can we as a society resist its urges without resort to violence to protect the peace?
-JC
Originally posted by kmax87I think we'd really need someone as reasonably intelligent as the president to answer a question like that. The answer would probably be "Mnah. Gah. Um", but don't let that fool you, the light of genius often hides itself under a bushel.
Is that analogous to an Angry halfway point of a broad spectrum frequency of zero deviation intellectually quagmired reprobates?
Originally posted by ChurlantYes. The Dresden fire bombing during WWll come to mind. They created a fire so intense that it sucked all the O2 out of the air in the city and literally killed everyone in it. It mostly killed civilians compared to armed combatants.
The truth is that events such as this are inherent to war, especially one involving a guerrilla insurgency. The problem is only exacerbated by placing very young men into life and death situations for which they are extremely well-trained for the physical aspects of survival, but where psychological preparation for these horrors is nearly non-existent.
T ...[text shortened]... ng war is not an attack or a slander of our men and women in uniform. It is simple truth.
-JC
Originally posted by kmax87If the Allies had lost the war the Nuremburg trials would probably have been in reverse. The clear signal that it sent was not to lose the war you are fighting.
The Nuremburg trials however sent a clear signal that not all is fair in war and not all means justify the ends. I would not begin to question anyones honour but it would seem that a pack mentality can develop anywhere amongst anyone and what would be fine and upstanding examples of citizenry one minute could turn and perform heinous acts the next. History gives us too many examples to think otherwise.
Originally posted by DelmerYou know what else that implies... 😲
" Finally, when it comes to raw IQ, Bush is in the mid-range of
American Presidents. In 1999, Charles Murray and I calculated, based
on Bush's SAT score of 1206 (old-style scoring system), that his IQ
was probably about 125 or a little higher..."
source: Steve Sailer, vdare.com:
So then that evidently makes his shoe size in the 125+ range.
Originally posted by scottishinnzI think your recurring bouts of static, with non intelligent, racially challenged, recalcitrant lifeforms, is conclusive proof of the tendency of entropy to increase in any system leading one to conclude that it probably isnt true that one could go from simple to complex. Therefore evolution is a myth, QED.
No, I just had to think of the most pathetic joke imaginable, so I chose you for inspiration.
Originally posted by kmax87Okay okay, I conceed!
I think your recurring bouts of static, with non intelligent, racially challenged, recalcitrant lifeforms, is conclusive proof of the tendency of entropy to increase in any system leading one to conclude that it probably isnt true that one could go from simple to complex. Therefore evolution is a myth, QED.