Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Nov 2006 08:33 In article <BM14h.8314$B31.7002(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eiq0h1$8qk_012(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <dGS3h.5355$7F3.3682(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> >>>"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >>>news:MPG.1fb9bd1d862e8abb989ab0(a)news.individual.net... >>>> >>>>> Dry wood burns very cleanly. >>>> >>>> It still stinks to hell. >>> >>>Not if you're using a good, modern wood stove, and good dry (particularly >>>hard) wood. >>> >>> >>>> I burn some in a fairly efficient stove, >>> >>>It's not just efficiency, it's also related to pollution control devices. >>> >>> >>>> but unless there is a wind blowing it's a mess. It stinks if it's >>>> still, >>> >>>Not if you're using a good, modern wood stove, and good dry (particularly >>>hard) wood. >> >> How do you make everybody do this? > >Why your desparate need to "make everybody do" things. Why not just let >them make their own decisions, and you make yours? Because there are never "do not burn" stamps on wood filled with arsenic. Because there isn't any pollution controls on burning wood. The ones who "sin" the worst are those who are rabid anti-smokers of cigarettes, consider the need for oil to be a mortal sin, and are against nuclear power plants. Yet these people have no problems with filling a whole neighborhood with smoke and arsenic. This is another example of perfection of inability to think. /BAH
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 08:40 "xray" <notreally(a)hotmail.invalid> wrote in message news:k9u5l2tn644sntciap2sbagjmb5fabq2bl(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 09:44:20 +0000, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>unsettled wrote: >> >>> However, the Republican Party >>> platform is more apt to provide for economic growth. >> >>Since when was a huge and increasing foreign debt the model for economic >>growth ? >> > > Foreign debt? That's so 80's and 90's. We started this war to try to > make our own internal debt far outshine our foreign debts. > > Of course, since we no longer make a large portion of the stuff we are > using in the war, you might still have a point. Ya think? Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 08:46 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:45531D87.D2766E37(a)hotmail.com... > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >> >Islamic societies are based on law. It is a law which uses the Koran as >> >its >> >guide rather than the Bible but it is still law. >> >> And that law is currently being interpreted so that all people >> who are not Muslim must be killed. > > No it's not. That is a complete fallacy. And since that fallacy is the very foundation of her fantasy world, I don't expect to ever disabuse her of that silly notion. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 08:50 "xray" <notreally(a)hotmail.invalid> wrote in message news:sr86l2pbivoprc0k949r3243vd3i59n95t(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 09 Nov 06 12:31:21 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>I don't how strategy work gets done, but Bush does have a coherent >>policy. > > That's a joke right? Sadly, no. Eric Lucas
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Nov 2006 08:48
In article <6IGdnSDI3PgvTMzYnZ2dnUVZ8s6dnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eisilb$8ss_006(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <l7idnSIMuLZKodLYRVnysw(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eindoh$8qk_004(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <L62dnR_UNZvcstLYnZ2dnUVZ8tqdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:ein7c1$8qk_004(a)s943.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>> In article <kTb3h.1659$r12.387(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, >>>>>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Ben Newsam" <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message >>>>>>>news:oojpk2tg7e5iphjsl7qdafkucotg01m67q(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:59:10 +0000, Eeyore >>>>>>>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Expansionism ? What expansionism ? After we ( and the other allies ) >>>>>>>>>kicked his >>>>>>>>>troops back out of Kuwait he wasn't doing any expansion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It didn't get into the papers much, but there was a continuous >>>>>>>> campaign of bombing and so on for many years after the Gulf War had >>>>>>>> allegedly ended. To enforce the "no fly zone" mostly, I think. Look >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> up. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And none of that had anything to do with "expansionism". At worst, it >>>>>>>*might* have been Saddam attacking his own citizens in the no-fly >>>>>>>zones. >>>>>>>However, based on the patterns of flights and such, I remember >>>>>>>analysts >>>>>>>at >>>>>>>that time suggesting it was only Saddam thumbing his nose at Shrub Sr. >>>>>> >>>>>> This was during the time when Clinton was in office. >>>>> >>>>>So the Clinton administration did indeed keep Saddam in check? Is that >>>>>what >>>>>you are saying? >>>> >>>> Take your reading comprehension pill and read me in the morning. >>> >>>No need to be rude, it was an honest question. >>> >>>However, earlier on in the thread it was commented that the enforcement of >>>the north and south no-fly zones were "keeping Saddam in his cage" and >>>here >>>you say this was an act of the Clinton administration - which, again >>>previously, you said did nothing. >> >> I should have added the word useful to that sentence. > >So you say the NFZs were not useful? Keeping a whole country cages in perpetuity is never a solution. It is a prerequisite for making a bigger mess later. See the Nazis' history for an example. Clinton's answer to everything was babysitting. What is worse is he started to contract out the work. This was, IMO, another attempt to undermine national security. The guy supposedly knew history. > >>> >>>You cant have it both ways. >> >> Tying up the military in babysitting jobs is doing nothing useful. >> That seemed to be Clinton's style. I never understood it because >> this approach did not work with Germany. > >The NFZ were put in place under Bush 1's leadership. So you do actually say >that Bush 1 did nothing useful? > >This "approach" has worked quite well in Korea for the last 50 years. No, it hasn't. We have much bigger mess to prevent now. >It >also worked very well in Germany - which if you haven't noticed is now a >democratic nation where the Nazi party are outlawed. Huh? Keeping Germany caged is how WWII started. > >One critical point is that, while lessons from history should be heeded and >learned, it is a major fallacy to make assumptions that because "A" caused >"B" in Country "C" then "X" will cause "Y" in country "Z." This is >especially true when the two countries are populated from very, very >different cultures. Humans tend to act similarly when it comes to survival tactics and strategies. /BAH |