I would vote for Chess. There have been incidents where women grandmasters have beaten their male counterparts in chess. Other sports are way off the mark, and females stand no chance.
There has been one female chess player who has ranked in the top 100 in the world and has won matches against chess world champions. The problem is the same as in other sports without a test of strength like Snooker or Darts - there are not enough women competing from a young age to identify those skilful enough to become champions. |
|
|
|
How does the US, always end up in the Group of Death?? Group H is ridiculous...
If we get out of this group, that means we deal properly with Portugal (CR7's team), Germany (World power of a team), and Ghana (Our nemesis). If we get out...we will have done well, and no team would say that we got out easy. If we get out we shall not be the ones fearing. Fair enough. I still hold hope our boys will do well, but I think Klinnsman has a lot more choices to make before next month. Ghana and Portugal are beatable, and thus 2nd place is obtainable. If we ever want the respect of the rest of the world, we have to earn it, and here's our chance. We can do this. Also Portugal floundered into the world cup, they tied Israel x2, Northern Ireland, and beat Luxembourg 2-1. They only made the world cup because Cr7 went beast mode for a two game span. Edit: Nate Silver projected the odds of advancement as Germany 93%, Portugal 40%, USA 39%, Ghana 29%. All is not lost. |
|
|
|
How does the US, always end up in the Group of Death?? Group H is ridiculous...
If we get out of this group, that means we deal properly with Portugal (CR7's team), Germany (World power of a team), and Ghana (Our nemesis). If we get out...we will have done well, and no team would say that we got out easy. If we get out we shall not be the ones fearing. |
|
|
|
|
Do so hope it works! Perhaps then we here in the USA can finally put the 40 year drug war to and end. Not only do countries that have legalized drugs see a decline in theft, violence and drug depency, incarceration is obviously reduced. Oh my, what will the for profit "prison system" do? Well hell continue the drug WAR!
|
|
|
|
United States would be mad to get into a situation where a military confrontation with Russia were even possible. Unfortunately, this does not mean that such a situation would not be possible in the right circumstances.
Nobody would have thought that the assassination of an Austrian archduke and his wife could produce the firestorm of World War I. Some historians have said that either side in that war would have been better off if it had accepted the other side’s most extreme terms at the outset. Theodore Roosevelt had a good point about “speaking softly and carrying a big stick.” Vainglorious ranting of “we are all Ukrainians now” is something that should be avoided, not encouraged.
Clearly, the times are gone when US could bully Russia as a “defeated nation” (which was never the case really, for those uninformed, I highly suggest Stephen Cohen lectures on the subject, staring with “US betrayal of Russia”), it’s time to either be partners or adversaries. |
|
|
|
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia plans to sign a contract with Iran this year to build two more nuclear reactors at its Bushehr power plant as part of a broader deal for up to eight reactors in the Islamic state, a source close to the negotiations told Reuters on Thursday.
Related Stories
It was not immediately clear how this might affect six global powers' talks with Iran addressing disputed aspects of its nuclear program. Iran has resisted demands for cuts in its uranium enrichment capacity, pointing to plans for a future network of nuclear power stations.
Western powers want any lasting agreement with Iran to put to rest suspicions that it could develop nuclear weapons-making ability through enrichment. Iran denies any such intent.
The talks ended last week with little progress; they are to resume in Vienna in June.
Russia, one of the six powers, built Iran's only operating nuclear power reactor, at Bushehr.
"Russia and Iran may sign an intergovernmental agreement this year on building from four to eight nuclear reactors, and, under the deal, the contract for the construction of the first two reactors as additions to Bushehr," the source said.
Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom said earlier it was in talks with Iran on the potential construction of more reactors there but revealed no details. Rosatom officials could not immediately be reached for comment on Thursday.
Longstanding Western fears that the Bushehr project could yield spent fuel of use in nuclear weapons - something it denies it is seeking to do - receded after Iran promised to send the material back to Russia.
Moscow voted for four rounds of U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran over its contested nuclear activity but has sharply criticized additional measures imposed by the United States and European Union, calling them a hindrance to diplomacy in search of a permanent settlement with Tehran. Video from Reuters @ http://news.yahoo.com/russia-may-build-eight-nuclear-reactors-iran-134635604.htmlI know the western freak show over Iran going nuclear is way overblown but it is sure used as a boogyman by neocons (the war on terror was yesteryear's boogy) to maintain support w/i the republican party by pretending to be defense hawks which shrouds their whoring for MIC profits. Anyone remember the clip of Obama whispering to Putin prior to his reelection saying that afterwards he'd have more leeway in foreign affairs.. I wouldn't be surprised if this Ukraine stuff and this nuclear biz is all meant to keep money flowing to weapons and tech innovation for all related top world companies as sort of a shell cold war 2.0 game. It's obvious to anyone w/ any semblance of intelligence that the US has already sold the farm and there's no financial way out besides inflation and war games to provide cover and shift domestic tension elsewhere the best they can. Think of the way North Korea plays their cards. "Russia, one of the six powers, built Iran's only operating nuclear power reactor, at Bushehr." This is the sort of disinformation that misleads the American public. Russia didn't "build" that nuclear power reactor. Russia "completed" the nuclear power reactor project that was abandoned by Germany following the 1979 Revolution. That project was the brain child of the US espoused by then US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, in his "atoms for peace" initiative. It supported the idea of building nuclear power plants in Iran to meet domestic energy demands in order to free up the extra hydrocarbons for export. Also, in the 60s/70s, it had been projected that Iran's oil reserves would have been exhausted by 2010 and the general consensus among the Western nations was that Iran needed nuclear power to secure its energy supply. Today, the West pretends as if the idea of Iran wanting nuclear energy for domestic use is completely absurd. You are 100% correct. Construction of their first plant-changed hand from the U.S. to France and then Germany finally was left incomplete because of revolution etc. What U.S. public doesn't know, like many things, is that the U.S. gave Iran its first reactor late fifties and early 60s,which was a research reactor located in Tehran University and still working. Our politicians always do everything to feed public with incorrect information. |
|
|
|
|
A new deal with iran and one with china as well. boy we are just having a good old time here in the USA annoying every one of our global enemies instead of trying to fix what's broken about our own country.
|
|
|
|
|
I am against any kind of sanctions and boycott, but America started this thing first.
The military and industrial power is now shifting in the east: Russia, China, India, Korea and Japan are controlling the needs of the world, while America is being slowly isolated. Except for the now obsolete IPhone, there is nothing else that the world is going to miss from this bloodthirsty continent.
|
|
|
|
Too many people are focusing on the political system of the new society. The reality is that the political system will end up reflecting the population's inherent nature, sooner or later.
The solution is to carefully select your people. Good genetics = good society. Whatever traits you want society to have make sure that they are abundant in your founding stock. Additionally you will want a sense of community, so make sure to select a small number of people, so that eventually everyone will have some sort of family connection to everyone else. I might go with as few as 64 founders, assuming that we would have rapid population growth to cope with inbreeding concerns, though I would probably double or triple that just to be safe. If population couldn't grow then I would select about 3000 founders.
People are always trying to gain power, and no matter how much conditioning to believe in the system they get, many someones will try to, and eventually successfully, put themselves above everyone else. Someone who has a superiority complex almost always has self worth issues. It's ironic yes but if we removed the self worth issues, the superiority complexes would probably go too. Also, what could be achieved by putting yourself in power that would be any better for you that the situation you are in now? I don't think any amount of conditioning can change human nature. We reep what we sow - and a seed only grows in favourable ground Well I think that human nature is only how we have learn to behave due to our surroundings and that the personality is a defense mechanism to reality. |
|
|
|
|
Just in case you guys were interested, in the US, there is no minimum age for which kids can get hormone treatments. The reason this is news is because the NHS controls the UK's healthcare system. The fact that these drugs were unavailable in the UK for so long is because the NHS is a universal healthcare system that's subject to government bureaucracy most of us are against. They've been available in the states because our healthcare system is based on supply and demand. The fact that these treatments are just now coming available in the UK should be looked at as a testament to how slowly bureaucracy can affect healthcare. By being social fascists who think the world should work the way you want, you're actually giving reason for a government body to control people's healthcare.
|
|
|
|
|
Republican House members don't want to give up the authorization to use military force because in the future they may want to use it on the Democrats.
|
|
|
|
I would like to see some of those pedophiles in jail, but we all know those false authorities will never going to see any punishment, maybe in the future, at least people might start to see them for what they are...
The Catholic clergy is too powerful, and I am sure that none of them are going to the jail. For the past several decades, the Catholic management has tried to hide the issue, by threatening the victims and bribing the media. Back in the day, scandal was hidden away by all organizations. There was no Internet to broadcast it everywhere. Now all this is coming to light. |
|
|
|
Just checked the US aid to Sudan wiki and found that we give Sudan $420,349,319 in federal aid.
WFT is our government doing giving this country anything that doesn't explode when it hits the ground? This is what's wrong with OUR country. I don't care about SUDAN. I've served in our military, fought in our "wars" and nothing good has come from it. Now you tell me that not only are these people so backwards that they would execute a citizen because they marry a Christian, but we're literally funding it. Shame on Sudan sure. But shame on us for giving them a single penny.
Until we realize that we're not the worlds police, we're going to continue to make mistakes that relegate us to our future role. No more democracy, just a hypocrisy.
The question is...where is this money going? for all you know the silly government could be funding terrorists..why aren't they following up with where the money is going? I honestly don't believe the money gets to the intended people it ends up on corrupt politicians I don't care what they do with the money. It doesn't matter. The Sudanese government shouldn't get a penny from our country. Their government is the problem. This woman didn't get sentenced to death by her local church. It is the law there. The federal law. Why we are giving them any money is just completely shocking to me and it needs to stop now! In an ideal world, giving aid money is a smart and logical thing to do.The idea of giving aid money to improvised nations is to help to build infrastructure and alone them to grow their own economies. It is in fact a brilliant plan, as America tends to make alot of products. If those countries use that aid money for the intended purpose, it becomes like an investment with more of a return than what was given. As those societies end up buying and re-buying our products. However, sometimes that aid money is used or taken for other purposes. |
|
|
|
|
So what I gathered from this piece is that it is not ok to rape little children, but it is ok to kill them before they are born....hmmm there is definitely no dissonance there.
|
|
|
|
Just checked the US aid to Sudan wiki and found that we give Sudan $420,349,319 in federal aid.
WFT is our government doing giving this country anything that doesn't explode when it hits the ground? This is what's wrong with OUR country. I don't care about SUDAN. I've served in our military, fought in our "wars" and nothing good has come from it. Now you tell me that not only are these people so backwards that they would execute a citizen because they marry a Christian, but we're literally funding it. Shame on Sudan sure. But shame on us for giving them a single penny.
Until we realize that we're not the worlds police, we're going to continue to make mistakes that relegate us to our future role. No more democracy, just a hypocrisy.
The question is...where is this money going? for all you know the silly government could be funding terrorists..why aren't they following up with where the money is going? I honestly don't believe the money gets to the intended people it ends up on corrupt politicians |
|
|
|
|
Coups are just the way Thailand changes its government. It happens about every 10 years on average. Put another way, no coup happens without the approval of the king who is highly respected in Thailand. So if a coup happens, it's because the king acknowledges that a change needs to be made. It's likely nothing serious and will help the country heal and move forward eventually, repairing the damage to its economy and reputation that has occurred over the last few years.
|
|
|
|
Too many people are focusing on the political system of the new society. The reality is that the political system will end up reflecting the population's inherent nature, sooner or later.
The solution is to carefully select your people. Good genetics = good society. Whatever traits you want society to have make sure that they are abundant in your founding stock. Additionally you will want a sense of community, so make sure to select a small number of people, so that eventually everyone will have some sort of family connection to everyone else. I might go with as few as 64 founders, assuming that we would have rapid population growth to cope with inbreeding concerns, though I would probably double or triple that just to be safe. If population couldn't grow then I would select about 3000 founders.
People are always trying to gain power, and no matter how much conditioning to believe in the system they get, many someones will try to, and eventually successfully, put themselves above everyone else. Someone who has a superiority complex almost always has self worth issues. It's ironic yes but if we removed the self worth issues, the superiority complexes would probably go too. Also, what could be achieved by putting yourself in power that would be any better for you that the situation you are in now? |
|
|
|
I know of one such case, I am sure there are more, in the US where the nine-year-old male child of a Lesbian couple felt sure he was the wrong gender. He was administered drugs which essentially chemically castrated him. When I learned of the case, he was 12 or 13 and living as a teenage girl. Where do they find doctors willing to prescribe these drugs in such an appalling situation? A child may be confused about many things regarding his/her place in the world. Isn't that an occasional part of being a child (or any human for that matter.)?That should never mean the child is given the responsibility of such a consequential decision. It is madness!
Story right here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2043345/The-California-boy-11-undergoing-hormone-blocking-treatment.htmlThe kid wanted to live like a male, but the lesbian parents forced him to have a sex change.  I read about that case, too. It wasn't that long ago if I remember right. Where is the state's child services when you need them - appalling! |
|
|
|
Why make such a life changing decision at such a young age. 9 years old!!!! still a child should be playing with friends , toys etc not trying to change sex. why oh why do the NHS proritise such treatment when people who are genuinely ill and need treatement for cancer etc are denied it because it is deemed too expensive. What going to happen in a few years when this child decides they want to be the sex they were actually born !!!
well, i don't know where i stand in this issue but to be fair, how would you feel if you are a 9 year old stuck in a girl's body, when you feel like a boy inside? that can torment you growing up feeling ostracized - like something is wrong with you, and other people keep a distance because of it. i guess if it's affect the kid so much that he/she is depressed, it could be a good idea to consider it. if the kid is not so affected by it, then maybe wait? also kids are developing at 9-10 years old, so maybe giving them those drugs gives them more time to develop into the body/appearance that they want. When I was 9 yrs old I wanted to be a womble, wonder if the NHS would fund "Womble change surgery"or a magical pill that would turn me in a womble? |
|
|
|
|
The visa ban was imposed in 2005, when George W. Bush was President. If anything, Obama & Kerry have quietly sidestepped it by reaching out to Modi well before he won the election.
It is correct to say, though, that the self-made, brusque, nationalist former tea-stall-owner has little in common with the also self-made liberal internationalist college professor and community organizer.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
