Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: joseph2k on 7 Oct 2006 20:02 T Wake wrote: > > "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message > news:clcdi2h9nj7cvvrc3orerb8kdgu50fg0js(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:42:27 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>It's only when Americans get killed you get mad. >>> >>>You're quite happy for the USN to kill innocent foreigners by the >>>planeload and it >>>doesn't even 'register on your radar' does it ? >> >> --- >> Oh, the righteous indignation... >> >> The pilot of the airplane was told to change his course because he >> was an apparent threat to one of our assets and its crew. He chose >> not to. Kaboom. End of story. >> > > I am sure you are well aware of how wrong this is. > > A passenger plane is a threat to a US Warship? How the mighty have fallen. I find that assessment odd in light of the ability of passenger planes to damage buildings like the World Trade Center towers impacts demonstrated. Equally to the point, when told to change course by any military, the refusal does not demonstrate reasonable judgment. -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
From: Ken Smith on 7 Oct 2006 20:03 In article <xfGVg.11941$6S3.9608(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message >news:eg72np$a4m$5(a)blue.rahul.net... >> In article <4525651A.5E36C356(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>> >>>> So how many prisons will we need to build, and what fraction of the GDP >>>> will >>>> go into staffing/supporting/maintaining them, in order to imprison 100 >>>> million people? >>> >>>That would most likely sap the entire GDP of the USA. >> >> No, not since it doesn't have to happen. I only spoke of the fear of life >> in prison being a deterent. If a crime is detered, it doesn't happen and >> the jail isn't needed. > > >We've killed 200,000 Iraqis, and it hasn't deterred a damn thing. We're >going to have to imprison a helluva lot more than that, if we want to >convince anybody to do anything we want. So, now please go back and answer >the question. You haven't put 200,000 terrorists in jail. You have killed 200,000 Iraqis. You can't expect killing a random bunch of folks that have nothing to do with the thing you are trying to deter to be an effective deterent. We also have already covered the idea that the threat of jail may be a much stronger deterent than the treat of killing. You would still have to make the threat apply to right people. Throwing a bunch of Brazilian plumbers in jail won't deter Islamic terrorists very much. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Ken Smith on 7 Oct 2006 20:08 In article <sPGdnWhqqOyW7LrYRVnyrw(a)pipex.net>, T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >news:xfGVg.11941$6S3.9608(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... >> >> "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message >> news:eg72np$a4m$5(a)blue.rahul.net... >>> In article <4525651A.5E36C356(a)hotmail.com>, [....] >>> in prison being a deterent. If a crime is detered, it doesn't happen and >>> the jail isn't needed. >> >> >> We've killed 200,000 Iraqis, and it hasn't deterred a damn thing. We're >> going to have to imprison a helluva lot more than that, if we want to >> convince anybody to do anything we want. So, now please go back and >> answer the question. > >Doesn't that imply killing them is not a deterrent? The problem is we are >killing Iraqis and the terrorist are Syrians. Even if the terrorists were Iraqis, the war has not selectively killed them. It has killed Iraqis more or less at random. > If the Jihadists thought they >would be jailed for life and have to suffer eighty years before they were >martyred it would take a fair bit of steam out of their sails. (IMHO of >course) I don't even think they can call it "martyred" if they die of old age. > > -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: joseph2k on 7 Oct 2006 20:51 Michael A. Terrell wrote: > T Wake wrote: >> >> This is a logical fallacy. Everything you have said can be true and still >> it would not disprove anything YD has written. >> >> Insulting someone does not change the validity of their comments, nor >> does eliciting sympathy for yourself. > > > If I needed sympathy, I wouldn't visit the vast troll playground > known as Usenet. ;-) > > Top drawer reply Mr. Terrell. -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
From: Ken Smith on 7 Oct 2006 21:11
In article <9eWdncK2mZOUcbrYRVnyuw(a)pipex.net>, T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: [...] >> Democrats don't want to talk about it; if >> they don't talk about it, they cannot deal with it. > >I dont know enough about American political infighting to respond to this. >However, If, as previously mentioned, the problem has existed for a century, >I suspect all parties are equally guilty of action / inaction. The republicans don't seem to be guilty of inaction. With the actions they have taken, the US is running out of feet though. [...] >No amount of extremist bombings can repeal your constitution unless _you_ >(American people) chose to allow it. Fear of the imaginary external threat >will cause more damage than some idiots with a bomb. It isn't the fear that causes the problem it is cowardice. Courage isn't the lack of fear. It is carrying on in the face of fear. Even a public that is afraid of an imaginary threat can refuse to give up its rights. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge |