Let's Have an Intelligent Chat, Shall we?

Ghandi's philosophy only works if you are fighting with Buddha. The middle east is NOT Buddha.

You cannot fight an unjust world and countries by using peace, its all about force for the greater good. Everyone else in the world know this, but they still dont want us acting, because America is an example, but when we are policing other countries sometimes we need to use our guns.

Dealing with the middle east: Try and put a tariff on gas and petrolium and see how well things go. We have no other way to punish the countrys leaders, we have to use force. We are dependent on those nations, hugely dependent. This is political, economical, and for the good of the Americans, no doubt, it would be stupid of us to have done this for humanitarianism alone. All of the above reasons are reasons that we are in the middle east. He who has the oil has the gold or green, but he who has the nukes has the bank.

So what good is it to use as an argument against the use of military?

We all know there is no such thing as a just world because there will ALWAYS be someone waiting in the wings to take advantage of any given situation.

Sorry Kevin, I may be one sided, opinionated and as flexible as a lump of cold steel but I'm like it for a reason.

Vigilance, determination and strength shown and upheld by me, Don and people like us allows you to have your say, what ever that may be. Don't forget that.

We are helping them for a multitude of various reasons.

Oil is part of it.

Helping the Iraqi people was a big part of it.

God and Allah are parts of it.

Terrorism is part of it.

Political standing is part of it.

Money and power are parts of it.

Freedom and principle are parts of it.

We arent pulling out and we arent losing the war. Whoever is a "fascist warmonger" in anyones opinion is doing this for the best interest of the country, they arent trying to bury us. They love America too and they think that they are doing their best, if we werent going to get something out of this we wouldnt be there, we arent there for the hell of it. Personal opinions are fine, but they are coming out of your ass (I'm only talking about the people who are saying fascist warmongers= Government, President, Republicans). The US is allowed to have vested interest and do the right thing at the same time. What is wrong with people...?

Let's just say I have first hand up close and personal experience of terrorism and leave it at that.

*winks with a wry smile*

:(

What is wrong with people?

It's easy to lash out when things don't go your way.

I'll paraphrase my Aunt's pov:

I didn't vote for him, I don't agree with him, therefore EVERYTHING he and his government does is wrong. HE sent my husband, brother cousin friend sister auntie pet tortoise to Iraq therefore HE is responsible.

This is the typical reaction these days though, whiich is a shame. Plenty of national pride so long as we remain all nice and peaceful, wrapped up in the cosy blanket of political correctness.

Nothing to do with people making a choice to serve their country anymore. Being a soldier today means gaining a trade, being a peace keeper, hearts and minds relations... anything other than actually being a soldier who might have to kill or die for their country.

I know.

But something is wrong that they dont see their actions.

Well Matt,

Ill only do it if theres protection ;)

On a more serious note, the protection fascist warmongrals can offer can be great for some nations and not so great for others, depends on who the fascist warmonger and their friends are.

Kaitlin, I don't disagree with what you said here:

"The US is allowed to have vested interest and do the right thing at the same time. What is wrong with people...?"

BUT... my only point is that if you allow your vested interest to lead you too quickly into an unwise action before your forces, plan, and international support are there, then it's questionable how much good you're doing.

As far as I'm concerned, the best situation for a nation possible is when you are able to "do right" at the same time that you serve your nation's interests.

Unfortunately in the piss poor manner that this was handled and approached--including the lack of decent intelligence, lack of tactical support for our troops once they were there, and allowance of various prison scandals, etc.--we most definitely did NOT "do right" at the same time that certain vested interests were aggrandized.

Like I said... there's a beauty to Special Forces. ;)

As to Gandhi... while I thought about Gandhi's resistance tactics, they are most definitely for use in specific situations:

(1) resisting one's own government and;
(2) resisting a government that is fairly reasonable and comparatively lacking in violent response.

Gandhi was facing the British government and British people of the 20th century, of whom more than a few members were sympathetic to Indian self-government by the 30s, let alone the 40s.

To overlook those rather positive factors is to delude the efficacy. To utilize such tactics against a highly aggressive, autocratic government is to lose many many people in the process and probably still not achieve freedom (other than that achieved through death).

By the way, I mentioned the British government and people of the 20th century because even in the 18th century the British government and people were a different factor with whom to deal. I cite the need for armed conflict to achieve freedom in both Scotland's case and the United States' case.

Scotland ended not with Culloden but with the brutal vengeance that the English enacted upon the Scottish peoples.

The US' story ended a bit more positively though the British did come back in 1812 to enact some more vengeance.

So passive resistance can only go so far depending on the opposition. But I would still tend to say that people cannot be handed freedom by another force after generations of oppression and have that freedom (1) respected or (2) last.

"people cannot be handed freedom by another force after generations of oppression and have that freedom (1) respected or (2) last."

Agree with you 100% there Miles. I can see a huge eruption in Iraq and the surrounding countries in about ten or fifteen years. Hopefully it will be an internal civil war though and not an aggressive offensive from the likes of Iran or Israel.

And as for us Brits? Well, we like nothing more than putting the boot in when a guy is down. Nothing like a little aftershock to reinforce philosophy.

Miles:

I agree with you full heartedly. The only reason that I stated what I stated was because so many people are hung up on the "we are only in Iraq for oil" ideal, and it is partially correct, but not fully disclosing.

People get upset that the US has a vested interest, but politically we are taking a risk for a reason. There are many, many reasons that we are in Iraq, oil being one of them. The US is allowed to get something in return, and in the end Iraq will be better off for it.

We should have waited for more support, no doubt, however I think that other countries would have never given it to us and would not have gone about it the right way either, I think that the world was waiting for the US to do something stupid, partially sabotaged our efforts, just for lack of political, physical, and monetary support and help, and knew what was going to happen all along, they waited for the grave digging to start, and pitched in their fair share.

The world should have helped the people of Iraq, the oppression and abuse that was going on was something that should have been stopped, there is no doubt about that, and the rest of the world turned their heads to the problem. So much for humanitarianism, right?

No one was willing to partake in the responsibility and put all of this on the US's shoulders, when in actuality this is the world problem, not ours. We put ourselves in the police role, and now we have a large burden to carry, but we are not totally wrong for being in Iraq. The only reason we are not justified is because of lacking support, but people are ignoring what actually went on there. The people of Iraq risked their lives to vote because they want change, and what the uber liberal media is hyping up is that Iraqi's don’t want us there, when in actuality they would like their country restructured and rehabilitated, but not under US control, and it wont be. They will someday be a fully self-sufficient nation, indebted to the US? Of course, but lets face it, most of the world is.

As for us rushing into this? Iraq (Saddam) was, has been, and would be a threat in the future if something was not done. He could still be a potentially problematic to deal with, and no one in the world was going to touch him. Unpredictable and psycho terrorists who are willing to die in the name of Allah and care nothing about humanity or the world need to be dealt with, because ultimately they will bring the world down. If the world is going to work in harmony and we are all striving for the better of us all, his influence needed to be removed. The world should have gone in with us, but for a multitude of varying reasons we went into it alone. We could have been more graceful, but it was a losing battle regardless.

We did what we had to do, and will continue to do so, regardless of people who would like to play the ostrich role and pretend like the middle east wasn’t our problem.

It’s always darkest before the dawn, and things will get worse, the whole world may be forced to get involved before this is over, but if we had done it cohesively in the first place its nature would not have been so potentially escalatory. The Middle East, Saddam, and Bin Laden were everyone’s problem, and the world is a better place without their negative influence.

"No one was willing to partake in the responsibility and put all of this on the US's shoulders, when in actuality this is the world problem, not ours."

Ok, K, you raise some very organised an well thought out points, but you're still focussing on the US as a police keeping force and not the other countries that are there.

The US State Department released this list of the "coalition of the willing": Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan and the United States.

So, although the US and UK are taking much of the flak we are not nearly alone. Half those countries have troops in one form or another working in Iraq right now, too.

Those countries are somewhat of a joke, besides the UK, we also have the republic of Palau, which you didnt put on the list, but monetarily and physically they cant do anything to help us or make a difference in the outcome. Most of those countries are there because they know that they wont really be called to do anything, and its another name on the list. They dont want to piss off America and it is somewhat of a brown nosing attempt. That list is small peanuts when you consider that there are disputably 191 to 193 countries in the world, and any of the influential or other powerful countries decided to give the US the heat, because no one is going to blame Slovakia or Estonia if this effort tanks.

The reason I am focussing on the US being the worlds police force is because thats exactly what people expect and exactly what our role is. It is the biggest aspect of our role in this war and why we are there at all. If the US werent policing the world we wouldnt feel an obligation to change the Middle East, or spear head this war and affirmative action.

That could have been different with a more tempered approach, but it wasn't so I won't go into that aspect. And whilst I agree with you in part I can't do so fully.

Just because any blame will fall firmly at OUR (Australia, UK and the USA's) feet it doesn't mean that the troops, security and intelligence agents, aid workers, guides, translators and logistical workers/contractors of from the other countries who are there shouldn't go without a little merit.

Those countries, joke or not, still have soldiers who have died to uphold the same principles and deserve that recognition at least.

I am not insulting or questioning the soldiers and the PEOPLE's efforts, I am saying that POLITICALLY its a joke. Those countries have people there because they can spare a few, they have faith in America, which is great, that they wont be called to pick up much slack. The US, UK, and Australia will keep everything in order, and these smaller countries have little to no responsibility. But the list is a joke.

These soldiers are not seen as lives, they are seen as numbers. Countries dont care about a few soldiers, they care about politics. How many can we spare....? And what is the equivalent pay off.

Read my poem "Toy Soldiers," its about this very topic.

I am not disrespecting the people who are brave and have laid down their lives for this cause, I am saying that the other countries who have more influence and a bigger name to offer should have stepped up instead of leaving it to 3 larger countries, and some little ones, this should have been a global effort.

i am totally lost~!!~ wat u guys talkin about?

So he has the nukes has the bank? Is that why the US and the UK are scared of Iran and North Korea?
What power on this earth or above has given the US or the UK the right to "Punish" other nation and their leaders?
I am amazed that so many here seem to endorse the use of force to further their nations needs!

THE WORLD is afraid of Iran and North Korea, the world is afraid of any leader who is unpredictable, easily pissed off, power hungry, and irresponsible, with bombs or biological warfare.

We can walk around on egg shells, trying not to piss these people and countries off, and let them gain weapons, etc. or we can do something about it and alleviate the problem before it gets bigger, other countries were ignoring the problem, but the US sees that the threat has gotten bigger and that it needs to be dealt with NOW. At some point we have to confront these nations, and you cant ignore it any more.

And the US and UK dont PUNISH anyone, we let everyone be who proves that they are responsible enough to conduct their own business, and the UN is supposed to do that, but since the UN obviously doesnt care about the Iraqi people and dont want to risk pissing a select few people off, it is Americas job.

And the power that is given that gives the US to do pretty much whatever they like is because most countries need us and we do the right thing and the humanitarian thing most of the time. Would you like any other country in power of the world? I think that the US is at least fait and predictable.

Its the WORLDS needs and the people of Iraq's needs that Saddam be out of power and terrorism be put to a stop. I dont see why thats so hard to grasp.

People can turn a blind eye because its not happening to them, well thats bull. Something needed to be done, and no one else was willing. The US stepped up to the plate and they will take the fall or get the glory.

And what was meant by this: "He who has the oil has the gold or green, but he who has the nukes has the bank." Is that the terrorists have power, people who have money have power, Saddam and Bin Laden are very powerful people, but the US has the nukes, so their money has very little influence, any country with bigger military power holds the glass cealing, IE: Bank, on how much their money and power can accomplish.

This is also true with the rest of the world, the US has enough military power and the largest collection of nukes in the world, therefor other countries dont want to screw with us, and if they are fair with us we will be fair with them.

Now see, I was going to reply to Brin's post, but you've covered everything and more already. So back to our talking point. (Brin, keep it coming mate.)

So, if it is a political joke why is it deemed necessary for the US government to mention them at all? Most if not all of us agree that the UN's go ahead was needed for the war and with an action mandate resolution that would have happened... but not without the backing of those countries.

Yes the United States is a big brother guardian country. Big boots, big technology and a big attitude. But in the UN it still only has one vote, just like Slovakia and Estonia. (I know this is isn't strictly true, but you know what I am getting at.)

If you want the global backing then these countries (and Palau) are the seeds of it. Considering the nature of world wide alliances 35 countries agreeing on this issue is pretty damned good. Especially former soviet block countries like Slovakia, Romania and Estonia who will, by nature, tend to side with their own big brother.

I see that list as being far from a political jokeand a vote from Palau just adds weight to it.

YOU ALL PISS ME OFF! IF YOU DIDNT WANT BUSH TO BE PRESIDENT WHY DIDNT YOU TRY HARDER TO GET JOHN KERRY INTO OFFICE! ENOUGH YOURE NOT CHANGING THE FACT THAT BUSH HAS 4 MORE YEARS!

It's 'Morons'... and the caps lock is on the left.

And yes, as the title suggests, intelligence would be nice.

Conversely it's comforting to know that some righties are just as base and inane as some lefties.

Ok all im going to say is that
A: you Violaxx or whatever is you wrote above that "moore exaggerates pretty much everything." so therefore, he most likely EXAGGERATED the facts in that movie of his
B: I know the lay out of a computer keyboard and in fact a typewriter probably better then you do considering I can make my own web pages (without the help of a web page host like Geocities) so I know where the Caps Lock is
C: There is no hockey so I am forced to take the aggression that I normally out on this keyboard then as I normally would screaming at the Flyers (and, trust me, playing Goalie doesnt always cut it, you know the big stick is hard to swing with a ton of pads on)
And D: I do love Bush, but its not because im a righty, I just dont like to give Homos and women the same rights as Traditionalists hold dear (and I am a woman and Guess what my 3 main duties are... COOKING CLEANING MAKING BABIES!

and dont ever call me insane

And dont ever question my intellegence (yeah i cant speak or write well, but I know damn well I'm one of the smartest people out there. Whats your iq again?

And obviously the title should be changed to
"why Bush sucks" or "Lefties inc."

And lastly dont bring up Palau if you dont actually know anything about it... I can say that because wait I have 3 REALLY good friends who would probably get pissed if they knew you even mentioned the place they were born without knowing one thing about it. (Oh and as they would say "Ahliah Bahbei!")

A: I hate Moore too.

B: I'm a writer.. i think we both know the keyboard just fine, glad you used the cpas lock key though.

C: There are plenty of morons on this discussion board that need yelling at, this is a moron free environment.

And D: Bully for you, love, more power to you. If you truly believe that though, why are you giving opinion instead of pressing shirts?

I said inane... look it up.

my IQ: 147 on a bad day.

I'm supporting Bush.

I don't know a thing about Palau and I'll admit it. But one thing everyone else here knows about me is that I WILL learn about it. And I defended Palau too.

cause i did all my work earlier like a good woman should

Sorry I did not see the lack of the "s" in Inane

Hockey is a blast

Finally my iq was tested and scored at 156

Good Michael Moore is a fat moron

Lastly Palau is a beautiful country and damn right you ought to defend it... Survior is on tonight

Apology accepted

Hockey is hockey, but baseball it ain't

My IQ hovers between 147 and 155 (I have a chemical imbalance which made me retired at 22) enjoy your spare point/s *grins*

Fat? yes. Moron... more misguided.

I don't watch much TV.

Just that Survior is in Palau this time is all...

Baseball? What is that? Come on chose a sport where the players can beat the crap out of each other and still be friends! Baseball is too much bull, although this hockey season is pissing me off... I am glad I get to play monday nights though... Being the goalie is fun

Moron he is in my opinion, fat there isnt a doubt, misguided... i wouldnt know im not his counselor.

Well being in the UK I dont get much Hokey.. we get Baseball though and I love it. Saw a Braves playoff in October when I stayed with my mate for a week. Totally hooked.

"cause i did all my work earlier like a good woman should"

Touché

I am so glad that this conversation turned around before I got here to comment, because Ali, I would have ripped half your IQ out of your head and stomped on it with all the stuff you are saying.

First of all I don’t know who on earth psychologically poisoned you growing up into thinking that crap about women, but that is absolutely not the truth. That may be the truth for YOU, but women and minority groups deserve just as many freedoms and rights as men do. How many IQ points does it take to cook a chicken and clean a toilet? If you are as smart as you say you shouldn’t be limited to doing those things unless it is your passion, you should be contributing to society with your knowledge and skill.

Also very few people on here are attacking Bush in any way, use some of those brain cells and IQ points to actually read something before you comment on it.

Most of the viewpoints that have been expressed have been neutral or the people that have been extremist have left the conversation for lack of intelligent things to add.

I do know something about Palau, I know 5 Palauan and that is a good portion of their population. There is no doubt that the Republic of Palau is a small freaking country, that’s not insulting, that’s a FACT. Other than that, I know little about it besides the fact that a fraction of our military outweighs there’s incredibly and they most probably have no bombs or nukes of which to speak.

And by the way smart people are not limited to 4 letter words and CAPS to prove a point. That did not show intelligence, that showed that you are quick to fly off the handle and slow to prove a point logically.

Kerry couldnt have done any better than Bush, I am a Bush supporter if anything, my only qualm is that he us uber religious (I am sure you are too, and a yank from the good ol' south, correct me if I'm wrong) and too conservative to inflict all of his views on America, such as taking away a womans right to choose (I am sure you disagree with me), but other than that I do not think he is a "fascist warmonger."

Now to Bret:

The reason that we listed them was because its better than looking like NO support whatsoever, I said it was a political joke on those countries parts strictly because no one pays attention to them, and yes, each country gets one vote in the UN, but all the countries vote with their big brother allies if they are smart, and that’s what those countries on the list did. Again, this is about jealousy and hatred of America in general, and we do have big attitude, but we have big military power, big influence, and big nukes to back it up.

One more thing, people drive me freaking insane, its not about DEFENDING people or principles. Thats personal, no personal attacks or references have been made on any of the countries of the world leaders. These are dynamics and these are reality that in many ways are undisputeable, and while some of us would rather be in denial and not accept things how they are, not all of us are.

Although everyone gets an equal vote, not all countries have equal pull, and the fact that 31 countries out of 191 (America recognizes 193, but the UN has 191, Palau may be one of the countries unrecognized by the UN) sided with us when how Iraq's people were being treated and Saddam were EVERYONES problem, not ours, is dispicable.

"I am so glad that this conversation turned around before I got here to comment, because Ali, I would have ripped half your IQ out of your head and stomped on it with all the stuff you are saying..."

(first off, you obviously are the rest of the way through this post...)

"...First of all I don’t know who on earth psychologically poisoned you growing up into thinking that crap about women, but that is absolutely not the truth. ..."

No one did, I decided that this is how I feel when I had to endure a women's studies class in college where they tried to feed their agenda down my throat... equal rights should be just that correct? Equal? so why are we not forced to sign up when we turn 18? Hmm? Maybe it is because we are not equal.

"...That may be the truth for YOU, but women and minority groups deserve just as many freedoms and rights as men do..."

Did I say it was the truth for every one else? if I did I appologize I simply meant that that is how I believe women should live, we were made from Man hence we should be humble and giving towards them in whatever way we should and can.

"... How many IQ points does it take to cook a chicken and clean a toilet?..."

This I am not sure about but I can find out if you would like me too.

"...If you are as smart as you say you shouldn’t be limited to doing those things unless it is your passion, you should be contributing to society with your knowledge and skill..."

What skill are you speaking of here? My skill of playing Hockey? Or my skill of making web sites? Either of these would get me no where... last part to that it is my passion... I enjoy children and doing things for my fiance.

"...Also very few people on here are attacking Bush in any way, use some of those brain cells and IQ points to actually read something before you comment on it..."

Brains cells I use for many things, secondly, I appologized for commenting so quickly... I am passionate about Bush

"...Most of the viewpoints that have been expressed have been neutral or the people that have been extremist have left the conversation for lack of intelligent things to add..."

Noted

"...I do know something about Palau, I know 5 Palauan and that is a good portion of their population. There is no doubt that the Republic of Palau is a small freaking country, that’s not insulting, that’s a FACT. Other than that, I know little about it besides the fact that a fraction of our military outweighs there’s incredibly and they most probably have no bombs or nukes of which to speak..."

They most definatly dont have bombs and they are small, and if you believe that 5 people are a large part of their population then you obviously havent met my friends entire family, considering her mother has over 8 brothers and sisters (all born in Palau) and several lengthy chains of family on that side.

"...And by the way smart people are not limited to 4 letter words and CAPS to prove a point. That did not show intelligence, that showed that you are quick to fly off the handle and slow to prove a point logically..."

Proving a point? no i didnt, slow to yes because i do like to think before I actually say something I mean. Secondly, in the first paragraph you say "****" (they have been removed/changed)and several times now you have used caps (not including above where you illustrate so kindly what capital letters are.)

"...Kerry couldnt have done any better than Bush, I am a Bush supporter if anything, my only qualm is that he us uber religious (I am sure you are too, and a yank from the good ol' south, correct me if I'm wrong) and too conservative to inflict all of his views on America, such as taking away a womans right to choose (I am sure you disagree with me), but other than that I do not think he is a "fascist warmonger."..."

No I am not from the south. I live in NY. Secondly Kerry lost so obviously he couldnt do better. Read my poem "You'll never know" so I believe a woman has a right to choose. Lastly I am not uber anything other then hockey and being a traditionalist. Good luck fighting this one.

Actually I have absolutely no need to fight this one.

Thank you for disproving my assumption that you would bite.

The only thing that I disagree with is you saying "we came from man," that’s a bible or religious reference, of which I do not subscribe.

Anyway I did see an e-mail once that read "We did not come from mans foot, to be walked on, we did not come from his head, to be above him, we came from his rib, to be close to his heart and by his side, protected and warm."

Anyway if I did think we came from mans rib I would say that was a correct explanation, however I don’t.

I somewhat agree with you that women’s roles are to nurture society and our families, and I feel as you do that it is important to cook, clean, and "serve" for your family and husband/ boyfriend, however I also think that women’s roles in society are much higher than that.

I was being sardonic, obviously, when I said "5 people," Palauans have relatively large families in general, however why I brought up the Republic of Palau at all was to add them to the list of the willing participants in the war, the support of the willing.

Also women’s studies looks into the role of women in society and general chauvinist oriented attitudes, as well as our inherent natures, if what they shoved down your throat bull like "we are equal," I don’t blame them. We don’t need women demoting us to servant status too, lets go back to being cave men while we are at it, and I don’t know what you meant when you said, "Equal? So why are we not forced to sign up when we turn 18? Hmm? Maybe it is because we are not equal." Last time I checked no one was signed up to do anything at 18, men or women. I also have slight problems with this comment, "Did I say it was the truth for every one else? If I did I apologize I simply meant that that is how I believe women should live, we were made from Man hence we should be humble and giving towards them in whatever way we should and can." If they are not humble and giving towards us, we are in no way indebted to them.

Men are hard wired to fight each other and protect their woman (territory in general) like women are hard wired to protect their children. That is the reason that men originally went to war while women were not drafted, however because of the feminism movement if there was a draft instilled women would be going as well. Women are more sensitive by nature and should be honored by the man they love like she loyally and faithfully love him. I honestly think women have more to teach men then men have to teach women.

I am in no way a feminist either, I just think its people with views somewhat like yourself that give men the jerky attitude that we need less of in this world.

Other than that, no qualms here.

Oh, wow... come home from a long day at work and find dozens of new posts.

This topic had ranged so greatly I don't even know where to start. I guess I'll jump in at the end....

I don't know about hard-wiring... I tend to think that's BS beyond the various research that suggests a tendency for more aggressive behavior the higher testosterone level in one's body is. But who knows! *shrug*

But let's definitely not get into what which gender can do better or worse in what roles because frankly that shifts with time. You go back a few thousand years and in certain parts of the world a woman warrior was just accepted.

A hundred years ago, a woman was never EVER going to be a secretary... that was a man's job because a woman couldn't conceivably handle it properly.

So many non-sensical ideas regarding women emerged out of the 1800s that it's a testimonial to the low effective IQs of the men who were coming up with them.

For example, one imbecilic masculine notion was that women were too fragile for exercise and/or any sort of serious physical activity because they were often faint when faced with such activity. Well, guess what... loosen the corsets a bit and maybe they could breathe a bit more easily. ;)

Men and women can do anything they put their minds to doing, even when idiots put anachronistic barriers to their manifesting their dreams. That should be sufficient proof that humans are humans, and not greater or lesser based on anything other than their own actions.

Yeah... I have to agree Don.

The one thing I don't get above all others is tne insessant need to hint, beat around the bush and turn the simplest thing into a confusing farce.

Interesting though.

We're hard wired to do that.

But honestly I dont get how girls think either. I really think I intellectually conceptualize things more like a guy. I dont have any girlfriends for that reason.

Girls incessantly manipulate, and guys dont get it.

I agree with Miles, everyone is individually capable to their own limits, not limits constituted by gender, however unarguably testosterone hardwires guys to fight and estrogen hardwires girls to nurture, so personality can also depend on where on the hormonal scale that you are.

Anyway- can we get back to the intellectual conversation please, because it seems like the intelligence bowed out when the topic went out the window.

Are you seeing anynone right now Kaitlin?

: )