When people represent themselves on online dating sites they only choose to show their aspects that they find to be attractive. Which leads to false representation which ultimately leads to a let down once a face to face meeting occurs.
Judging from personal experience ( those around me ) I have yet to see an online relationship end up working, so my personal opinion on online dating is that it is not worth it.
Touché.
I don't think that is a very appropriate analogy.
It wasn't one of my best, I was at a loss for a good analogy. However I personally feel that the general idea is the same, I believe that the point of the debate isn't if you get both. It is if you solely socialize online that is a link to loneliness. To which in my mind ( with no studies to back it up ) could indefinitely be a direct correlation to loneliness, as it is in human nature to socialize.
It can be, but isn't necessarily, rooted in physical activity.... fake or necessarily less satisfying?
According to what you have told me you get equal doses of both forms of communication, therefore neither are less satisfying. However you would need to step in another's shoes to be empathetic with the idea of solely socializing online. From personal experience when I was ill for two weeks my only form of communication was via my computer, I can tell you even with all of my "online friends" I found myself in a slight form of depression.
Though I still stand by my initial ideal, I do believe you make solid points.
Regional intervention is often more effective at producing change. Whilst groups such as the UN may be successful in keeping the peace in the countries they are involved in (questionable in itself), once the soldiers leave, their philosophy leaves too. By having regional groups intervene, we can be sure that the influences they have in the country will not leave once the troops have, as regional politics will ensure that progress after peacekeeping is continued.
Women are equal to men in the armed forces, but they are not the same as men. While the vast proportion of jobs in the armed forces are open equally to men and women, there are some to which women are just not physically suited. While some women are able to meet the absolute physical requirements for front-line combat such as carrying a wounded soldier, throwing grenades or digging a trench in hard terrain, most are not.
Anarchism is marked by a utopian, unrealistic argument - a diatribe based on the principle that the grass is always greener on the other side. Far from freeing humans, anarchy allow them to be dominated by primitive forces that a controlling state has eliminated, such as the use of physical force by the strong to oppress the weak. Laws and a police force are necessary to prevent this. A state allows industries to be organized and crops to be grown so as to support its citizens, and without these high-intensity techniques there is no way that all the population could be fed. All advances in art and science have been made possible by a state that brings people and resources together. Anarchism is merely a backward and dreamy approach to serious political matters.
Anarchism is essentially a fight for human freedom. Modern states, even those which claim to be democracies, stifle their citizens with oppressive and artificial machinery such as laws and taxes. These are imposed by the people who run the state - the elites, the governing classes. Anarchists believe it is better to live without such controls imposed by such people. As it is in human nature to be free.
Many African countries end up being involved in wars that are set out to procure diamond mines and other resources within war zones, and thus certain countries end up having a greater vested interest in fueling wars, opposed to resolving them.
Interference is more often than not a necessity, especially when regarding genocide. As it is the duty of other nations to protect the innocent when a nation's defenses are either not enough or are the problem within themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Those are all pretty good things that have come out of America.
And my own personal point has been proven: that you truly are unable to discuss anything in a serious or coherent manner.
