What's new

Iranian military engine development news and updates

Thiose are not valid examples. You misunderstand my comments.


I did not say that. Please read again.


I did not say that. Please read again.
Regarding the examples I provided of competitive models coexisting with amplified ones, specifically in the smartphone market competition between Apple and Samsung, you stated that these are not valid examples. However, I would like to understand your reasoning for this claim. The competition between these two companies is a clear example of how competing projects can drive innovation and improve quality for the end consumer. Both companies work to improve their products in order to outperform the other, resulting in technological advancements and better products for consumers.

Additionally, in response to my statement that you claimed there are no real examples of successful competitive models, you stated that you did not say that. However, in your earlier response, you stated that "there are few issues with the theory of competitive models in practice. There are no real examples." This statement seems to imply that you believe there are no real examples of successful competitive models. Can you clarify your stance on this?

To further address your claim that competition only leads to destruction, you previously asked me "why do you believe 'competition' breeds innovation rather than sowing destruction?" This statement seems to imply that you believe competition leads to destruction. However, in your most recent response, you denied making such a claim. Can you clarify your stance on this issue and provide evidence to support your position?
 
.
Nothing I've seen leads me to conclude there's famine in Korea. Multiple people I know who traveled there witnessed no signs of such either.
1 or 2 year ago a north korea soldier escaped to south , how many disease he had?
what about black market in north Korea , don't it point to the fact that income is less than desirable
and worse of all , turning the country into a cult that worship ruling family, what it tell you?
if it was one or two time then i said its falsified but when everybody who escape north song the same theme then that ring a bell.
right now if you go N. Korea you only can visit limited area and you can only interact with selected few isn't it strange to you

As said no government is perfect but on balance the DPRK is more conforming to values I consider to be most fundamental and worthy of sacrifice.
does your value include the worship of ruling family and make a God out of the founding member of the dynasty?
that is something I can never accept.
 
.
1 or 2 year ago a north korea soldier escaped to south , how many disease he had?

According to the south Korean regime, the CIA etc.

what about black market in north Korea , don't it point to the fact that income is less than desirable

It doesn't necessarily point to incomes being "too" low. Assuming western-published open source material on the topic is credible at all.

and worse of all , turning the country into a cult that worship ruling family, what it tell you?

That it's an alternate model of governance. I would never take it over Islam of course, but pretty much over selling out national independence and dignity if these were my two options.

if it was one or two time then i said its falsified but when everybody who escape north song the same theme then that ring a bell.

Because they actually have a choice? And their hosts wouldn't make life rather difficult for them if they refused to echo the official narrative?

As far as I remember there've been some reports about how south Korean intelligence (well versed in coercion since they inherited all relevant techniques from an absolutely iron fisted regime which subsisted well into the late 1980's / early 1990's if not beyond) will immediately brief dissidents arriving from across the border on what exactly they're supposed to tell the media and what they mustn't utter under any circumstances. Failure to comply would get them into trouble - in a place they're totally unfamiliar with and where they enjoy no social connections.

Iranians applying for asylum in the west "are" also systematically either homosexual, prosecuted political activists or converts to some underground Evangelical church - or so they claim. Well, this does ring a bell but perhaps a differently tuned one.

right now if you go N. Korea you only can visit limited area and you can only interact with selected few isn't it strange to you

I don't find this strange in view of the country's security imperatives as well as its modus operandi in terms of defense.

This said, visitors get to see random locals in numbers, even though they may not interact with them personally. Now if people as a general rule were starving in the DPRK then it ought to reflect itself in their outer appearance.

And those crowds travelers come across do not consist of "actors" (one western source I saw went as far as suggesting that the Pyongyang metro is a wholly inoperative Potemkin village, set in motion only when foreign visitors are taken for a tour in there, which would imply that every Korean present at the stations or boarding the carriages is but a trained protagonist... no comment).

does your value include the worship of ruling family and make a God out of the founding member of the dynasty?
that is something I can never accept.

If you read my post again you'll probably notice it was explicitly confining itself to the comparison between the two opposing systems in Korea. The DPRK does a better job than south Korea in upholding values I deem to be paramount.

By the way in terms of religiosity, over 55% of south Koreans do not follow any religion at all whilst some 20% have converted to Protestantism read Evangelical, zionist American churches in essence (the kind of which someone like Pompeo is adhering to as well). A traditional belief system grounded in local history like Buddhism no longer appeals to more than 16% of the population.

To be honest I'm not sure a cult of the political leader drawing inspiration from ancient domestic culture nonetheless, can be considered this much worse than sort of a mix between spiritual wasteland and neo-colonial uprootedness, civilizational alienation. Again speaking strictly within the intra-Korean framework.

Other interesting tidbit: the DPRK allows a single mosque on its soil (at least it used to be so last time I checked) - and that mosque is located on the embassy compound of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Pakistani diplomats sometimes join their Iranian colleagues there for jama'at prayers.
 
Last edited:
.
Iranians applying for asylum in the west are also systematically either homosexual, prosecuted political activists or converts to some underground pro-zionist Evangelical church. Well, it does ring a bell indeed but not necessarily the one you seem to be thinking of.
not exactly , i personally knew many Iranian , who get asylum over social situation which had nothing to do with homosexuality or politics.
being part of those groups make it easier but its not the only way to get asylum and always there is the way of migration
According to the south Korean regime, the CIA etc.
before korea war N. Korean were larger than their southern brothers now the situation is reversed . how can you explain that by anything other than malnutrition at childhood
That it's an alternate model of governance. I wouldn't take it over Islam of course, but definitely over selling out national independence and dignity.
well honestly I even prefer the mafia ran Russia or Nazi ran Ukraine over that cult rule , always remind me of how MKO is ran
I don't find this strange considering the country's security imperatives and their modus operandi in terms of defense.
my explanation is they are hiding something
This said, visitors get to see random locals in numbers, even though they may not interact with them personally. Now if people as a general rule were starving in the DPRK then their outer appearance ought to reflect it alright.
they see random people of certain area , haven't you heard about N.Korea empty showcase villages .
thew most famous one is just beside S. Korea border
Potemkin village, which is set in motion only when foreign visitors are taken for a tour there, which would imply that every Korean present in the stations or boarding the carriages is but a trained protagonist... no comment).
that village is just over the border and easily watched from S. Korea nothing meaningful happen there
If you read my post again you'll probably notice it was strictly confined to the comparison between the two opposite systems in Korea. The DPRK does a better job than south Korea in upholding values I deem to be paramount.
they uphold some values yes , but they add some other value to those values that i consider Anti Value
 
.
not exactly , i personally knew many Iranian , who get asylum over social situation which had nothing to do with homosexuality or politics.
being part of those groups make it easier but its not the only way to get asylum and always there is the way of migration

The fact remains that many, perhaps a majority of asylum seekers will make up stories along those lines in order to achieve their goal.

before korea war N. Korean were larger than their southern brothers now the situation is reversed . how can you explain that by anything other than malnutrition at childhood

Type of foodstuffs consumed could play a role. More importantly though, I have no reason to trust western statistics on the DPRK. They never went there to conduct empirical surveys so these figures are basically mere estimates from sworn enemies. Needless to say, this ensures a heavy amount of bias. I'm rather surprised people would take at face value "studies" conducted in this fashion.

well honestly I even prefer the mafia ran Russia or Nazi ran Ukraine over that cult rule , always remind me of how MKO is ran

The MKO is objectively speaking a traitor to its land and people. To me this exceeds in mischief their cult-like form of organization by a huge factor. Organized criminal groups it could be argued are treasonous as well. So are Ukrainian neo-Nazis who've accepted NATO and zionist overlordship.

But the DPRK doesn't fall under the mentioned category, so it's got an overriding aspect right.

my explanation is they are hiding something

From what is known of how the DPRK ensures its national security - and it doesn't enjoy too many options in this regard, letting a single foreigner in will be fraught with serious challenges onto itself. Allowing foreign visitors to travel around in perfect autonomy wouldn't square with the security setup, conflicting with it in too many ways.

they see random people of certain area , haven't you heard about N.Korea empty showcase villages .
thew most famous one is just beside S. Korea border

In a vast city residents aren't confined at all times to their sole neighborhood. When visitors use the metro or visit urban landmarks for instance, they will come across people from other areas of town as well.

that village is just over the border and easily watched from S. Korea nothing meaningful happen there

A village is one thing, a city of over a million another. Yes the DPRK is apt at minute social control but potential gains stemming from this sort of a stunt, aimed at no more than a small handful of tourists, would hardly justify the investment associated with an orchestration of this magnitude.

they uphold some values yes , but they add some other value to those values that i consider Anti Value

It's all about the ranking one will ascribe to those respective values.
 
Last edited:
.
Regarding the examples I provided of competitive models coexisting with amplified ones, specifically in the smartphone market competition between Apple and Samsung, you stated that these are not valid examples. However, I would like to understand your reasoning for this claim. The competition between these two companies is a clear example of how competing projects can drive innovation and improve quality for the end consumer. Both companies work to improve their products in order to outperform the other, resulting in technological advancements and better products for consumers.

Additionally, in response to my statement that you claimed there are no real examples of successful competitive models, you stated that you did not say that. However, in your earlier response, you stated that "there are few issues with the theory of competitive models in practice. There are no real examples." This statement seems to imply that you believe there are no real examples of successful competitive models. Can you clarify your stance on this?

To further address your claim that competition only leads to destruction, you previously asked me "why do you believe 'competition' breeds innovation rather than sowing destruction?" This statement seems to imply that you believe competition leads to destruction. However, in your most recent response, you denied making such a claim. Can you clarify your stance on this issue and provide evidence to support your position?
My statements and posts were clear and in straight and elegant English. I suggest you read them again and you will have the answers to your questions. You will also see MY questions and statements you have not yet responded to.
 
.
My statements and posts were clear and in straight and elegant English. I suggest you read them again and you will have the answers to your questions. You will also see MY questions and statements you have not yet responded to.
I understand that you believe your statements and posts are clear and written in elegant English. However, I respectfully disagree. In fact, there are several instances in which your writing is unclear and contains grammatical and spelling errors. For example, in a previous post, you wrote "Thiose are not valid examples" instead of "Those are not valid examples." Additionally, you have made several errors in sentence structure and use of vocabulary.

Other examples:
  • in the sentence "can you exclude these terms and make your points again without them?", "them" should be replaced with "it" as "terms" is a singular noun.
  • In the sentence "The resulting modification might indeed shed light on what are fixes, suggestions, or best practices are", the second "are" should be removed as it is redundant and grammatically incorrect.
  • In the sentence "You’ve painted yourself in a corner with your argumentation", "argumentation" is not a commonly used word in English, and "argument" would be more appropriate.
  • In the sentence "You are making broad statements of 'belief' and not giving supporting facts. The burden is one you to demonstrate why your beliefs are correct", "one" should be replaced with "on" as it is a preposition, not a pronoun.
It's also worth noting that you made several logical errors in Your arguments, such as misinterpreting my points, making sweeping generalizations without evidence, and failing to provide examples to support your own claims. These errors suggest a lack of attention to detail and critical thinking, which could weaken your overall argument.

Regarding your statement that I have not responded to your questions and statements, I believe I have addressed all the points you have made in our debate thus far. If there are specific questions or statements you feel I have not addressed, please let me know, and I will do my best to respond to them.

You made several misinterpretations and logical errors in your arguments. Some examples of these errors include:

  1. Misinterpreting causal relationships: In an earlier response, you argued that the competition between Apple and Samsung in the smartphone market was not a valid example of successful competition and amplification models coexisting. However, this assertion seems to ignore the fact that these two companies have been able to coexist and compete because of the benefits of competition, such as driving innovation and efficiency.
  2. Logical errors: In Your response to my point that competition can be beneficial in certain contexts, you asked, "Why do you believe 'competition' breeds innovation rather than sowing destruction?" This statement is a false dilemma fallacy, as it presents only two extreme options when there are actually a wide range of possible outcomes of competition. Furthermore, your earlier statement that "competition only leads to destruction" is a hasty generalization that is not supported by evidence.
  3. Lack of clarity and precision: Throughout the discussion, You made several statements that are ambiguous and unclear. For example, when I asked You to clarify your position on competition, you responded with a series of questions that did not provide a clear answer to my original question. Additionally, your statement that your posts are "clear and in straight and elegant English" is a subjective assertion that is not supported by the evidence of numerous grammatical and spelling errors in your writing.


Definitions:

Clear and direct communication
refers to expressing thoughts and ideas in a straightforward and concise manner, without using ambiguous language or unnecessary complexity. It allows for effective understanding and reduces the likelihood of misunderstandings. In our previous discussion, there were several instances where your statements were unclear and difficult to comprehend, as I have pointed out. Using correct grammar, spelling, and sentence structure can greatly enhance clarity in communication.

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that can make arguments appear valid or persuasive when they are not. There are many types of logical fallacies, such as ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments, and false dilemmas. When making arguments, it is important to avoid using fallacies, as they undermine the credibility of the argument and can lead to misunderstandings or flawed conclusions.


@jauk Some Other of the Eristic Dialectic forms and argument types that I have observed in your responses:

  1. Red Herring Fallacy: This is a tactic where the argument is sidetracked by introducing irrelevant or unrelated information. For example, when I provided examples of successful competitive models, you responded by asking me to exclude certain terms and questioned the elimination of terminology.
  2. Ad Hominem Fallacy: This is an attack on the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. For example, when you accused me of using western capitalist terminology, rather than addressing the argument I made.
  3. Strawman Fallacy: This is when an argument is misrepresented in order to make it easier to attack. For example, when I argued that competition can be beneficial in certain contexts, you responded by stating that I claimed competition is always better than cooperation.
  4. False Dilemma Fallacy: This is when only two options are presented, even though there may be other options available. For example, when you stated that there are no real examples of successful competitive models, even though there are both successful and disastrous competitive models.
I would like to have a fact-based and constructive discussion with you. I believe that using logical arguments and avoiding fallacious reasoning will help us come to a better understanding of the issue. Let's focus on the topic at hand and avoid getting sidetracked by irrelevant information or personal attacks.
 
Last edited:
.
Every time I am notified of a new response, I think of something new, of news, and instead...
gentlemen users, I think it is more appropriate to talk and bring news related to the topic of the discussion title " Iranian military engine development news and updates", do you agree too, or not!

Thank you
 
.
Regarding the examples I provided of competitive models coexisting with amplified ones, specifically in the smartphone market competition between Apple and Samsung, you stated that these are not valid examples. However, I would like to understand your reasoning for this claim. The competition between these two companies is a clear example of how competing projects can drive innovation and improve quality for the end consumer. Both companies work to improve their products in order to outperform the other, resulting in technological advancements and better products for consumers.

Additionally, in response to my statement that you claimed there are no real examples of successful competitive models, you stated that you did not say that. However, in your earlier response, you stated that "there are few issues with the theory of competitive models in practice. There are no real examples." This statement seems to imply that you believe there are no real examples of successful competitive models. Can you clarify your stance on this?

To further address your claim that competition only leads to destruction, you previously asked me "why do you believe 'competition' breeds innovation rather than sowing destruction?" This statement seems to imply that you believe competition leads to destruction. However, in your most recent response, you denied making such a claim. Can you clarify your stance on this issue and provide evidence to support your position?
I believe we've taken up too much unrelated bandwidth here so I'm disengaging. Again, your questions are based on not reading my posts or misunderstanding them. It's all there.
 
.
I believe we've taken up too much unrelated bandwidth here so I'm disengaging. Again, your questions are based on not reading my posts or misunderstanding them. It's all there.
Dear @jauk ,

I would like to express my gratitude for engaging in this discussion with me. While we may have different perspectives on the topic, I appreciate the opportunity to learn from your point of view. In some areas, I do agree with you.

However, I do want to mention that I have tried my best to carefully read and understand your posts. I have tried to respond to each of your arguments to the best of my ability, but I have not been able to understand why you keep repeating some of your points. It seems like you are saying the same thing over and over again without providing any new information or evidence.

That being said, I respect your decision to disengage from this discussion, and I hope that we can both take something away from this conversation. Thank you again for your time and input.

Sincerely, Arash1991

@sahureka2

Thank you for your input and bringing the discussion back to the original topic. I appreciate your contribution to the conversation. Let's continue to discuss the developments in Iranian military engine technology and any relevant news and updates.
 
Last edited:
.
Dear @jauk ,

I would like to express my gratitude for engaging in this discussion with me. While we may have different perspectives on the topic, I appreciate the opportunity to learn from your point of view. In some areas, I do agree with you.

However, I do want to mention that I have tried my best to carefully read and understand your posts. I have tried to respond to each of your arguments to the best of my ability, but I have not been able to understand why you keep repeating some of your points. It seems like you are saying the same thing over and over again without providing any new information or evidence.

That being said, I respect your decision to disengage from this discussion, and I hope that we can both take something away from this conversation. Thank you again for your time and input.

Sincerely, Arash1991
Thanks. Implicit from your logo I hope you will be a positive contributor here. It carries much to live up to. It denotes leadership, justice, and revolutionary thought-- not to mention وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ قُوَّةٍ'. At least. See you in the field.
 
Last edited:
.
Every time I am notified of a new response, I think of something new, of news, and instead...
gentlemen users, I think it is more appropriate to talk and bring news related to the topic of the discussion title " Iranian military engine development news and updates", do you agree too, or not!

Thank you
ISI failed at almost every front, their only objective is to rule at any cost ...
They can't even design and manufacturer simple 110 HP car engine after more than 44 years exclusive market ... All things are lies in Iran ...
 
.
Thanks. Implicit from your logo I hope you will be a positive contributor here. It carries much to live up to. It denotes leadership, justice, and revolutionary thought-- not to mention وَأَعِدُّوا لَهُمْ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ قُوَّةٍ'. At least. See you in the field.
Dear @jauk

I would like to apologize for using ChatGPT during our discussion in the forum without informing you. I believe that this was unfair of me, and I deeply regret my actions.

Although ChatGPT allowed me to express my arguments in a more objective manner, I now realize that my behavior was passive-aggressive and unfair to you. I want to emphasize that ChatGPT did not do any work that was not my own, but rather I simply used its functions by giving it instructions, such as searching for contradictions in your argument.

I also want to explain that I did not use ChatGPT from the beginning, but only later, after I had tried it out and realized how well it worked. I do not use ChatGPT constantly, but only as a supporting tool.

I want to be transparent about my motives and admit that I was curious about how far I could push the use of ChatGPT and whether my argumentation would be accurately represented. However, I recognize that this was wrong and unethical.

I am writing this also to raise awareness that some members may not be familiar with ChatGPT, as it is a relatively new software. Perhaps we can all now be more cautious and aware of the tools our opponents may use.

Finally, I would like to apologize to you once again and assure you that I will be fair and honest in our discussions in the future.

Sincerely,Arash1991

bout ChatGPT: ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence software based on the latest deep learning technology, capable of understanding and generating natural language. ChatGPT can be used to simulate human conversations and generate answers to complex questions. However, it is important to note that ChatGPT does not have human intelligence and its answers are based on patterns in the data on which it was trained.

this text was also written by chatgpt after i gave him my instructions in bullet points on which topic i should write.


 
.
Dear @jauk

I would like to apologize for using ChatGPT during our discussion in the forum without informing you. I believe that this was unfair of me, and I deeply regret my actions.

Although ChatGPT allowed me to express my arguments in a more objective manner, I now realize that my behavior was passive-aggressive and unfair to you. I want to emphasize that ChatGPT did not do any work that was not my own, but rather I simply used its functions by giving it instructions, such as searching for contradictions in your argument.

I also want to explain that I did not use ChatGPT from the beginning, but only later, after I had tried it out and realized how well it worked. I do not use ChatGPT constantly, but only as a supporting tool.

I want to be transparent about my motives and admit that I was curious about how far I could push the use of ChatGPT and whether my argumentation would be accurately represented. However, I recognize that this was wrong and unethical.

I am writing this also to raise awareness that some members may not be familiar with ChatGPT, as it is a relatively new software. Perhaps we can all now be more cautious and aware of the tools our opponents may use.

Finally, I would like to apologize to you once again and assure you that I will be fair and honest in our discussions in the future.

Sincerely,Arash1991

bout ChatGPT: ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence software based on the latest deep learning technology, capable of understanding and generating natural language. ChatGPT can be used to simulate human conversations and generate answers to complex questions. However, it is important to note that ChatGPT does not have human intelligence and its answers are based on patterns in the data on which it was trained.

this text was also written by chatgpt after i gave him my instructions in bullet points on which topic i should write.



Which explains why you weren’t understanding my posts. Note, you need to have a good understanding of how to prompt cgpt (or any other LLM based bot). If you don’t, you see the results. Cgpt is a powerful mechanism that requires deft hands.

Regardless it’s ok. Nobody can judge you on using the tools of the brave new world.
 
.
Which explains why you weren’t understanding my posts. Note, you need to have a good understanding of how to prompt cgpt (or any other LLM based bot). If you don’t, you see the results. Cgpt is a powerful mechanism that requires deft hands.

Regardless it’s ok. Nobody can judge you on using the tools of the brave new world.

on gab.com they have an AI what paint pictures of the things you wrote/described. Its funny thing.

gabbi.png
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom