http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/election...nate_Obama.html

why does every powerful leaders who represent Black people eventually die sooner?

JFK, MLK, Malcom X, Lincoln, and a few of people were killed.

This is so sickening. Such strong racism and hate still exist today which is ridiculously unbelievable. I thought Americans knew better and had already gone over history. History isn't suppose to repeat itself.

But, history does repeat itself.
Hence the saying "history repeats itself".
But, yeah. To hope he won't be assassinated is just that, hoping. I'm pretty sure he will be. I think he knows he will be. It's just a matter of how long he will be in office before it happens. I think he has the power to make some really great changes, to be the next great leader (and we all know America needs one) but all it takes is one Nazi f**k with a well executed plan to kill him.

But, I do hope it doesn't happen for a very long time.

As a history major, I'd like to question you on that. Repeat is basically a reproduction or a replica. Or, if you define repeat:
1re·peat
repeat
a: to say or state again b: to say over from memory : recite c: to say after another2 a: to make, do, or perform again <repeat an experiment> b: to make appear again <the curtains repeat the wallpaper pattern> <will repeat the program tomorrow> c: to go through or experience again <had to repeat third grade>3: to express or present (oneself) again in the same words, terms, or formintransitive verb: to say, do, or accomplish something again ; especially : to win (as a sports championship) another time in succession

So, if you take that as a definition to the use of repetition in your statement, where in history do you get repetition?



That doesn't make sense.

ridiculous?

And, come on. Does this really surprise anyone? Of course this much racism still exists. Don't be naive.

Shoo, I wuz plannin on killin dat dem n*gger maself.
/endwhitetrash.

The War in Iraq and Vietnam seem kind of like a repeat to me.

I saw this on the news a couple of hours ago and all I can say is wow how can they be so stupid.

A repeat would have to be an exact similarity. Not to mention that the factors that led to the both wars in Iraq and the war in Vietnam are completely different. You could say that Vietnam started in the 50s with Eisenhower when he blocked the election in Vietnam because he knew that the Communists would win, or with JFK, or with the escalation of troops with Johnson. The two gulf wars began with different factors than the Vietnam War. You could say that possibly the general idea of invading Iraq both the first and second times were similar, but ultimately the goals are unrelated and how they began are so very different.




I use different too much.

^
but you bought up good points.
---


it's pretty interesting. i hope Obama should at least know his consequences and should expected possible death due to consistence racism. let's take a look in the past. MLK knew he was about to die. i think he mentioned in his speech but whatever, i don't remember when and how he said it. Malcolm also knew he was about to die soon. i don't know about Lincoln's knowledge of his death especially JFK.

Pretty Sad.. the world we live in depresses me sometimes.

You're misinformed. Either that, or you just pulled that statement out of your ass. How is this non-kinetic 'war' that we're currently involved in here in Iraq, a "repeat" of the Vietnam War? Enlighten us, for we are so ignorant, apparently.

A "repeat", besides being used in a figurative context, extends only as far as the degree necessary to make that connection. The Iraq conflict is usually considered a repeat of Vietnam in regards to our foreign policy measures, what public consensus of our involvement amounts to, contending with rogue guerillas (we can go all the way back to the jungles of Bataan in WWII for this) and organizations as opposed to a government militia (Saddam's troops, themselves, were easily and shortly demolished), the need for efforts beyond a military solution in light of having to stabilize civil war, and plenty more.

To address misoshiru's definition: "...to win (as a sports championship) another time in succession" obviously doesn't mean, in the most literal interpretation possible, that every ensuing athletic victory is an exact clone on every single variable of some original performance.

Of course not, but the factors leading up to the wars are different and foreign policy is definitely not a repeat in the gulf wars and in Vietnam. And if you see it as a general type of "oh we're at war again", then this type of 'repeat' can apply to everything. It's like saying the current economic crisis is a repeat of the 1929 stock market crash and the depression that came subsequently.

You obviously don't learn much in English class, either.
As for the Obama thing, this is pretty sad.

This does not merit discounting any paralleling factors at all as a figurative "repeat". Your own definition obviously isn't positing every factor of a sporting event to be identical with one another, but they are "repeats" as far as similar circumstances that stand in contrast to what would otherwise be different occasions.



If it was simply that, then Thermopylae would be as apt for comparison as Vietnam, nevermind WWII. I cited specific components that collectively amount to making such a judgment.



Exactly. It would not be fallacious to say, "We are facing a repeat of the 1930s" in regards to simply contending with an unprecedented economic downturn, with every other variable being its own. This falls squarely in line with your definition's example.

I took the entire definition from Merriam-Webster's online. I'll admit, I didn't read through the entire definition. But if you want to take it so figuratively, you could say that basically everything is a repeat of something else.


I don't believe that the current economic situation is a repeat of the 1930s. I only said that as an example of what people may say for "history repetition."

I believe in similar situations, but definitely not repetitions.

fag. :[

Not really. Some circumstances will be more akin to past instances than others, so the amount that adds up in making a collective call on whether the overarching situation possesses enough similarities to resonate varies. Iraq is similar to Thermopylae in the fact that both involved carbon-based lifeforms, but that's not enough to be useful in warranting a connection. Iraq and Vietnam, on the other hand, are often cited as lessons on how foreign policy should be conducted. Again, being "figurative" only extends to whatever the intended degree is.



A similar situation is a repetition of like circumstances, so in order for a similarity to even exist, there must be some contingency that carries over, or repeats, and underscores the rest of the picture, regardless of how much it may differ otherwise. This is not an opinion.