Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 2 Feb 2007 10:41 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:epvepo$8qk_023(a)s893.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45C1F6C2.699C14D3(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>>How about an example ? >>> >> >>> >> Food coupons. >>> > >>> >I think you misread. You were talking about freedoms. Do you mean the >>> >freedom from Food coupons was suspended? >>> >>> I consider being told what I can buy and when I can buy it >>> a loss of choice. Freedom involves each individual making choices >>> and coping with the consequences of those choices. >> >>I think you should read up about rationing during WW2. > > I have. Didn't the US institute rationing? Or doesnt that count? > It is significant that England couldn't figure out how > to stop war rations until 3 decades after the warring stopped. When do you think WWII finished? Rationing ended in 1954, I am fairly sure the second world war finished _after_ the 1920s. Did you mean 1 decade? >>You have some daft fanciful ideas about it it seems. > > I also listened to the stories of my elders. Perhaps you should > ask some for their stories. I lived through the very last years of rationing. Do you want my stories?
From: unsettled on 2 Feb 2007 10:42 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <epvj81$gav$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > >>In article <epvhqp$8qk_040(a)s893.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>[.....] >> >>>According to MP, the specs say 'power off'. Power is never >>>off unless not-plugged-in in these days of computer boards. >> >>Even before the computers stoves often had a clock and stuff like that. >>Some applicances had neon glow bulbs in them. They would from time to >>time decide to emit RF too. > > > There are plans for even cereal boxes to emit them. I'm waiting > for those men designers to include a clock when that happens. The question is will the designers be smart enough to put the clock on the back of the box which is what kids read again and again. I'm surprised they don't sell that space for advertising other kid products.
From: T Wake on 2 Feb 2007 10:47 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:epv914$8qk_001(a)s893.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <Je6dnSM7i4LLCF3YnZ2dnUVZ8saonZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:epq281$8qk_001(a)s856.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <a_WdnXJGRKBVMiLYRVnytwA(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:epnqqm$8ss_017(a)s858.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <MvidnQbxmY5PSCHYnZ2dnUVZ8sSrnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:epi5ci$8ss_002(a)s804.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm trying to address a mistaken assumption these people are >>>>>>> making. Their idea of war is when two highly organized groups, >>>>>>> each funded and supplied by a single government, meet on >>>>>>> a field somewhere and shoot at each other; thus, conflicts of >>>>>>> any other nature has to be treated as criminal and apply >>>>>>> a country's criminal law to each individual. >>>>>> >>>>>>Oh dear. The last two weeks of posts have vanished out of your memory >>>>>>now, >>>>>>haven't they? >>>>> >>>>> I'm still working on the original problem; I haven't solved it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>While you are doing that you can remind us what the purpose of the >>>>Geneva >>>>convention is (in your opinion) >>> >>> It was an argreement among countries about the rules of fighting >>> were when they were fighting each other. Boxing, or any sport, >>> does the same thing. This is a Western idea. >> >>Do you feel a nation, which is at war with a nation which is not a >>signatory >>to the Convention is bound by the terms of the convention? > > No, not when it creates weakness. Wow. So the rules only matter when you are winning? Don't you ever wonder why the US signed up to a document which is binding even if the "other side" are not signatories? >>>> and what European country asked the US for >>>>help in Korea. >>>> >>>>That would be an excellent start. >>> >>> I'll talk about the fighting that happened under Truman after WWII. >>> AT that time, none of the European free countries were in any >>> position to wage the coming fights that were to be called the >>> Cold War. Yet these same countries did not want Communism to >>> spread. So the US was the only country who had enough resources >>> to lead and do most of the supplying. >> >>So in reality, when Truman went to the UN to request support and a UNSCR >>to >>justify the conflict, this was actually an unnamed European nation >>requesting US help? > > The UN was created to deal with problems that would cause another > world war. If Truman had not gone the UN, the UN would have been > as pitifully weak as the League of Nations. It was not in US' > best interests to constantly keep bailing out Europe whenever they got > their wooden heads wedged. Glossing over the current US' administrations attitude towards the UN, this is a massive none-answer. Which European nation was really asking for help when Truman went to the UN to ask for a resolution and commitment by other member states? Remember, the US was not the only UN member nation which put boots on the ground in Korea. >>Instead of saying what you plan to talk about, why not identify which >>European nations requested US assistance in Korea? >> >>This may be of interest to you: (The wonders of wiki) >> >>"The North's start of an all-out civil war came as a surprise to the >>Western >>powers. The U.S. did not have an emergency response force ready, but it >>did >>have a large military and reserves, and a cadre of highly experienced >>officers and sergeants. President Harry S Truman ordered U.S. naval and >>air >>forces to stem the North Korean advance, but they were not allowed to >>attack >>north of the 38th parallel, and especially not into Chinese or Russian >>territory. >>The initial units sent in were drawn from the U.S. occupation forces in >>Japan under the command of General Douglas MacArthur. Truman ordered >>MacArthur to transfer munitions to the South Korean Army and to use air >>cover to protect the evacuation of American citizens. Truman also ordered >>the Seventh Fleet to protect the island of Taiwan. Although the Chinese >>Nationalists offered to participate in the war, the Americans declined >>because they were poorly equipped and trained, and politically, there was >>a >>risk that Nationalist participation would encourage overt intervention by >>the Chinese communists. The first significant American combat unit to >>arrive >>in South Korea was Task Force Smith, part of the U.S. Army 24th Infantry >>Division based in Japan. On July 5, it engaged in the first North >>Korean-American clash of the war at Osan. >> >>The United Nations immediately acted, ordering the invaders to withdraw >>and >>calling all members to support South Korea. > > European nations were a part of this request. It was an important > part of the Marshall Plan to allow the European countries to have > a say in how to deal with their looming enemy, Communism in Russian > clothes. Which European nations were part of this request? Considering this seems to be a deeply held opinion of yours, I am surprised that in over a week you have not been able to name which nation you are talking about. You keep saying "european nations." >> A UN command was established >>under the control of the United States. Britain, Australia and other >>Western >>powers quickly showed support and volunteered to aid in the effort." > > I [see] European references in that sentence. Yes. You can. Well done. Now, am I right in thinking you are using "quickly showed support and volunteered to aid" to mean "asked for help?"
From: T Wake on 2 Feb 2007 10:52 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:epvk5a$8qk_002(a)s893.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <HLudnYPGZfi7Bl3YRVnyvgA(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>news:45C0944C.DE540314(a)hotmail.com... >>> >>> >>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>> >> > >>>> >> >No. If you go around opening the cage door on rabid pitbulls, you >>>> >> >are >>>> >> >responsible for people getting bitten. >>>> >> >>>> >> I'm glad you agree with me about keeping these types locked up. >>>> > >>>> >It doesn't have to mean physically locked up. >>>> >>>> With today's transportation technology, it does. There is no >>>> Australia-type piece of land to keep them from making messes >>>> in other peoples' backyards. >>> >>> It's a shame there isn't a suitable island somewhere really. >>> >>> I'd prefer to see Islamist trouble makers deported to a Muslim country >>> rather >>> than locked up. >> >>I doubt the Muslim country that was on the receiving end of these nutjobs >>would be too happy. > > Especially when the troublemakes got sent back home without > accomplishing their job. You assume that they were sent by the nation which they are sent back to.
From: T Wake on 2 Feb 2007 10:58
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:epvknj$8qk_005(a)s893.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45C1F5EE.19D5F4E2(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: >>> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >> >> >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>> >> >> >> > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> >>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. >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> >Democracies create laws and enforce them to deal with such > issues. >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Those laws apply to the citizens of that country during peace > time. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >And in wartime too. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> No. You need to learn about your country's war powers and how >>> >> >> much of your peacetime freedoms were suspended during WWII. >>> >> > >>> >> >Nonsense. >>> >> > >>> >> >How about an example ? >>> >> >>> >> Food coupons. >>> > >>> >In exactly what meaningful way is that a loss of 'freedom' ? >>> >>> You could not buy what you wanted nor what you needed without >>> government permission. >> >>Permission ? The coupons could be used for many different foods btw. >> >> >>> >Rationing continued after the war btw. >>> >>> I know. That is another point of evidence that England couldn't >>> shake the socialist type of governing. >> >>It has zilch to do with socialism and everything to do with a shortage of > food >>you nitwit. > > There wasn't a shortage after the war was done. Yes there was. >>Did you know that health actually improved during the period of rationing >>btw > ? > > Do those stats exclude everybody who died from bombs and bullets? Well, no. He was talking about "health" figures. Not mortality or life expectancy or things like that. |