A few people have been stopping by my blog and making ignorant statements based on a profound lack of understanding of the past and present actions of the United States government, as well as international treaties (not to mention human psychology etc).
I hope that the following links should help clear up that lack of understanding, and that anyone who wishes to post here would at least take the time to peruse these links and try to gain some understanding before ignorantly aggravating both myself and the other readers and commenters on my blog.
Thanks.
U.S. Foreign Policy in the Periphery: A 50-Year Retrospective.
The Laws of War.
and for good measure, to hopefully head off the childish "good versus evil" types:
Evil.
and last but not least; Terrorist.
Please think before you type. If you're not sure about what you're saying, then go double check first before making yourself look like an idiot, because odds are, I will illustrate your lack of understanding.
There is intelligent discourse to be had here. Valid points to be made. But bickering with ignorant morons who lack any real understanding of the larger issues involved here is a waste of time. For instance, touching on the fact, based on an actual knowledge of the Laws of War, that the "terrorists" are not abiding by them... which leads into a more in-depth look at exactly why the "terrorists" are led to use the means they do to wage their war, and why they not only do not follow the Laws of War, by why they cannot follow them. That is the kind of discussion that merits the time and attention of both myself and my readers.
Thanks again.
13 comments:
You are such a sad, sad person.
actually I'm rather happy. :-)
I'm just a little bored today. I think I'll make some ramen after this next episode of Naruto, and then I'll straighten up the kitchen. maybe check out the next Japanese lesson. :-)
sounds like a plan.
Consider the following. It's the 8th inning and you are protecting a one run lead. Your bullpen is rather weak, but you have an exceptional closer. Pujols, Rolens, and Edmonds are due up in the 8th. Do you defy convention and bring in your closer in the 8th?
I don't really know shit about baseball, so I have no idea. :-) I'm not a sports person.
you tell me, what would you do? obviously baseball is more your cup of tea. :-)
please explain. it'll be a learning experience. :-)
OK well historically, baseball managers are like lemmings and they will only bring in their closer (their best pitcher to get 3 outs to preserve the win) in the 9th inning. I've always thought that you should use that closer in the situation where the other team is most likely to score runs.
In my scenario, Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds are fearsome hitters who hit 3rd, 4th, and 5th respectively in the Cardinals lineup. If you put some glue job in to face them, they will have a very good chance of scoring. Personally, I would put my closer in to get those 3 outs, and then take my chances with my glue job getting the bottom of their order out.
Amazingly, THIS NEVER HAPPENS.
Since you are unbiased and a blank canvas on this topic, tell me what you think from an outsiders perspective.
I'm new to this discussion, but have vastly studied the history of the United States, especially its foreign policy in Latin America for the past 100 years. I have always laughed at the "Laws of War" I guess. That's kind of an oxy-moron, in war you try and kill as many people on the other side until you win. That's it, the "rules of warfare" are a mystic political word to put a diplomatic face on something horrific like war. Not to say certain countries as a whole have tried to fight wars in a dignified way, but the appearance of keeping to the laws of war is nothing more than PR dancing to exude the moral high ground that they're not really following completely.
What do the "laws of war" have to do with baseball? Keep up, Matt G.
matt g.: well put. I agree. ;) that's the kind of commentary I like.
anonymous: from what you've said, I'd say I'd probably do the same thing. (I curiously wait to see where you're going with this. ;-) heh)
I'm not going anywhere with it. You would like baseball though, it's basically just a big chess game. A lot of super intellectuals who don't like sports are obsessed with baseball.
hrm. I've never been a big baseball fan for some reason. I would say that aside from Basketball, it's probably my least favorite. sports are something I either play, or have no interest in. the only time I watch sports is if I happen to know someone playing and I'm at the game in person.
but you make an interesting point... it's something I'll keep in mind. :)
You can watch baseball in a different way from the average Joe Blowhard. I imagine that is the way George Will watches it. Pitching changes, lefty/righty maneuvering, when to bring your infield in, when to sacrifice bunt, etc. Every game comes down to 4 or 5 decisions that a manager must make.
At an even deeper level, every pitch is a mental battle between hitter and pitcher. The pitcher is trying to determine whether the batter is looking for offspeed, breaking, or fast pitches, and in what location the batter is thinking the pitch will be. The batter, who has charted every at bat he has ever had against the pitching, is trying to guess what pitch will be thrown in what count.
Of course, you might be forced to watch the Detroit Tigers, who play in the monstrosity that is the American League. The designated hitter takes away from all strategy and intrigue. That is bourgeois baseball, steer clear.
hahaha *makes note* ;)
I actually turned down good tickets to a Tigers game when I was living in Detroit last year. several of my friends were going and had a ticket for me... I told them I really didn't care for baseball and sent my girlfriend with them instead. :-P I know that seems rude, but I really didn't care about the game and really just needed some time at home alone without her... so I got the much better deal for me at the time.
Post a Comment