Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Jan 2007 07:59 In article <epd4ue$f3g$3(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >In article <2cda2$45b94c58$49ecf8f$1275(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> In article <45B8C4A5.BCD7F27C(a)hotmail.com>, >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>They [Europeans] can afford to make >>>>>these errors because their governments assume the US will >>>>>save them with its military might. >>>> >>>>What do we need your military might for ? >>> >>> >>> I don't know. I suspect so the politicians can point at the >>> US and call us the bad people when things don't go perfectly. >>> Smoke and mirrors. >> >>We saved them twice in the last century. They've done nothing >>to improve their security situation since then, so eventually >>we'll probably have to save them again. >> > >Yes, all that stands between the Iraqis and Britain is... > >Well, Turkey, Greece, all the Balkans, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, >Belgium, Netherlands, the Alps, the English Channel... > >But hey, the invasion is probably under way! > >After all, the US saved Europe from Genghis Khan, right? With modern technology, supply routes for the military doesn't have a limit. That's what stopped the Ottomans. I'm not sure about Genghis Khan. I haven't read enough about how he and his sons set up their governing. I do know that it took quite a while before the Russians stopped paying their tribute to the Khans. /BAH
From: unsettled on 27 Jan 2007 08:07 MassiveProng wrote: > Indeed, dipshit. Laugh. You certainly don't have enough brains to > put forth a real argument. LOL, I work with what you give us to work with, which is actually nothing at all.
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Jan 2007 08:01 In article <45BA08CD.A94D6585(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> The only thing I've been discussing in this thread is about very >> speicfic mess preventions. The US is trying to deal with preventing >> these messes. > >But it's the USA that's responsible for the underlying scenarios that causes >these 'messes' in the first place. hmm....Thus, using your reasoning, if you get shot during a bank robbery, it is your fault for being in the bank. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Jan 2007 08:05 In article <EZCdnXAW06sMgCfYnZ2dnUVZ8tyqnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:epd04r$8qk_003(a)s846.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <45B91AD6.7B9E306D(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> They [Europeans] can afford to make >>>> >> these errors because their governments assume the US will >>>> >> save them with its military might. >>>> > >>>> >What do we need your military might for ? >>>> >>>> I don't know. >>> >>>Neither do I. The 'host countries' for your overseas bases quite like the >> income >>>from them though. >> >> And you also keep asking for our help. > >Can you give a couple of examples? WWI, WWII, Viet Nam, Korea, West Germany, Balkans. > >> England isn't as bad as >> the rest of, what used to be, free Europe. > >"Used to be free?" > >When did it change? Are you still thinking about the Holy Roman Empire and >it's dominance over the Franks? Europe used to be split into what was called free Europe and the Soviet satellites. <snip> /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 27 Jan 2007 08:12
In article <epd57v$f3g$6(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >In article <epcqla$8ss_002(a)s846.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>In article <9ZWdnVA-cKYNmiTYRVnyvgA(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:epacgd$8qk_002(a)s795.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <ru2dnXYbBez24CrYnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:ep7jd1$8ss_006(a)s899.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>> In article <45B64130.D6F8E740(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>>>In the UK it's a crime to belong to an illegal organisation or aid/abet >>>>>>>one. >>>>>>>Additionally it's apparently a crime also to fail to disclose/report >>>>>> knowledge >>>>>>>of such things. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>That would seem to cover pretty much what's required. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are people, who are arrested for that crime, able to post bail >>>>>> before they are tried in your country? >>>>> >>>>>Anyone who is arrested _may_ be released on bail, however if they are >>>>>considered a danger then it is unlikely. Most people charged under the >>>>>various Prevention of Terrorism Acts we have had over the years have been >>>>>refused bail. >>>>> >>>>>Are you worried that a guilty person may be offered bail? Is it worse if a >>>>>guilty rapist is offered bail? >>>> >>>> It's a similar problem. Take that guy who goes after boys. He >>>> can get out because the judge allowed bail. I don't trust judges' >>>> descretions any further than I can spit. >>> >>>You really do not want to live in a representative democracy do you? >> >>Even a representative democracy needs to have some way to deal >>with the people who go after little kids, and make other kinds >>of messes. A democracy does not, and never has, meant that >>all people can do anything they want without punishment. >> > >No, but it does mean they have the right to a trial before they're punished. You keep insisting that the people who want to destroy Western civilization are criminals. Under whose law? When a military group from another country blows up bridges and trains and kills civilians, I call that a war, not a criminal act. <snip> /BAH |