Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its been 1000's of years now that man has understood the requirements of power in a suggestion. In modern times effective marketing must recognize these requirements or loose the sale.
1) Present the problem along with a suggestion of the reasons for the problem.
2) Provide a solution which address's the issue and also att to, the faulty reasoning responsible for the problem.
3) If possible give the customer choice's in like solutions. ( that way the customer doesn't feel pressured and believes he or she is following the reasoning alone, and thus can take personal credit for wise thinking instead of handing it all over to the pitch.
All you did is agree insult with blah blah blah....(contradiction) and close your brief case, walk out and show no interest to begin with, with zero solution or fine tuning to the suggestion. So what this means is there is nothing to suggest there is any believed problem at all.
Actually, I realized the bla bla might be taken as an insult (not meant that way) and changed to to falling asleep, while you were still typing.
In some respect I do agree, but life is not closing the deal for 95% of us. You've heard the term "you can please some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time"... humans are not a one-size-fits-all species. One mans solution is another mans problem.
To transmute all of the worlds problems and quantify them into a simple sales formula? If I told you my opinion I would offend you for sure, since bla bla did.
These are the men and women who are running the show. Everyone should read this and pay attention to the North American Group, and the commissions and agencies these people chair.
Actually, I realized the bla bla might be taken as an insult (not meant that way) and changed to to falling asleep, while you were still typing.
In some respect I do agree, but life is not closing the deal for 95% of us. You've heard the term "you can please some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time"... humans are not a one-size-fits-all species. One mans solution is another mans problem.
To transmute all of the worlds problems and quantify them into a simple sales formula? If I told you my opinion I would offend you for sure, since bla bla did.
Oh no, I would never really be insulted on a communication. Ive seen fit to protect myself with how I word things and design entries. My thinking is that there is no reason these primitive barbaric issues need to continue. Saying one size fits all, or all the people cannot be pleased, will not work as an excuse. Chaos does have its limits. Ones man's solution is not another's problem if both recognize the solution can only come about with doing without. Thats the problem selfishness. My sales formula had to do with the perpetual commentary by everyone including experts, its total bunk, and everyone knows it together with blah blah blah and no solution or fine tuning at all(defeatist) This whole issue and unrest in the world has to do with comfortable power leaderership who forget what they are involved about together and never serve the consequence's of their decisions outside of book sales, that seems fair. The opinion is they need a collective report card and have failed humanity.
Last edited by macpherson; 08-28-2013 at 02:39 PM..
The rebels are the top suspects as they easily have the biggest motives.
Assad has a motive NOT to do it, why the hell would he want to give the West a reason for striking.
The Pentagon seems to believe the American public are utterly stupid and don't have any ability to think for themselves, lets hope this time they are proven wrong.
Well articulated, and if it turns out to be true, the obvious question becomes, why is the admin so eager to blame Assad? Biden is already out there saying "no doubt" that it was Assad.
Another interesting question: if the rebels did it, who supplied them? There are several possibilities. One is that someone in the regime turned on Assad. Possible but not likely. Another is that the rebels manufactured their own supply. Very unlikely. Last but not least, perhaps it came over from Iraq at some point.
I haven't anything about rebels being guilty of gassing people in this incident except for Assad's saying so. Waiting for the proof that is said to be coming. After all we have people appointed to determine just that as we have juries. Other is only conjecture as always.
Well articulated, and if it turns out to be true, the obvious question becomes, why is the admin so eager to blame Assad? Biden is already out there saying "no doubt" that it was Assad.
Another interesting question: if the rebels did it, who supplied them? There are several possibilities. One is that someone in the regime turned on Assad. Possible but not likely. Another is that the rebels manufactured their own supply. Very unlikely. Last but not least, perhaps it came over from Iraq at some point.
Rebels have captured a number of military bases. They could have gotten the WMDs from there.
No way, this is a huge waste. Once we overthrow these dictators, jihadists take over. Also could possibly start ww3.
WW3? With who? Who with any sense thinks that anyone besides iran would lift a finger to help assad? The West could level syria, and the next day, only the hezbollah filth and lowlifes in iran would care in the least.
Rebels have captured a number of military bases. They could have gotten the WMDs from there.
If you had been following the war more closely, you'd have known that the SAA had long ago moved all of its chemical weapons stocks into safe, protected military bases far from rebel-controlled areas. If there was even a remote chance that the rebels could have gotten their hands on any chem weapons of significance - not tear gas, I'm talking VX and sarin - the US and regional players would have sent in their spec teams to eliminate them.
This was an attack by the regime, and unless one has an agenda, can see it as such.
“There were multiple rockets fired by a specific delivery system,” Harf said, emphasizing that only Assad’s regime has that sort of capability.
The Salafist al-Nusra opposition forces, she said, definitely did not have the capability to use the type of chemical weapons that were deployed in the attack.
WW3? With who? Who with any sense thinks that anyone besides iran would lift a finger to help assad? The West could level syria, and the next day, only the hezbollah filth and lowlifes in iran would care in the least.
Russia cares.
The plunge into taking military action on Syria is not just reminiscent of Iraq, but is representative of Obama’s continued hot war against Russia that has gone from proxy to direct over the last several days.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
