Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 16 Oct 2006 20:55 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > Jonathan Kirwan wrote: > > > > The article I read pointed out that the soldiers explicitly were under > > a Euro command and that if they were ordered _into_ their own country > > for some reason, that they must have already sworn to uphold the Euro > > command and not obey those in command in their own home country. > > What happens when they are ordered to attack their own country? How do you think that would happen ? Is Oregon likely to declare war on California ? Graham
From: Jonathan Kirwan on 16 Oct 2006 21:24 On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:36:21 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >Jonathan Kirwan wrote: >> >> The article I read pointed out that the soldiers explicitly were under >> a Euro command and that if they were ordered _into_ their own country >> for some reason, that they must have already sworn to uphold the Euro >> command and not obey those in command in their own home country. > > What happens when they are ordered to attack their own country? How hard is it for you to imagine the case here in the US, for gosh sake? Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that on May 17, 1954, the US Supreme Court rules in some case called Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, unanimously agreeing that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional. Just hypothetically, of course, overturning the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson ruling, sanctioning "separate but equal" segregation of the races and now ruling that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Let's also say that, just hypothetically speaking, that in order to comply with this Brown v. Board decision, a place called Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas made plans to integrate blacks around the hypothetical time of September, 1957. Let's also say, just hypothetically, that when nine black high school students arrived to attend, that they were met by angry crowds and that the governor of the great State of Arkansas, a hypothetically named Mr. Orval Faubus in fact, just happened to order his own Arkansas National Guard to keep the black students out of the school. Just hypothetically, you know. So let's say that faced with such defiance, a US President named -- oh, let's just say named Dwight Eisenhower -- responded by sending troops from the 101st Airborne to Little Rock with orders to protect the nine students. Just hypothetically, you know. Now, suppose you happened to come from Arkansas and you were in the 101st Airborne and ordered to disobey the Arkansas governor and to go against the state's own Arkansas National Guard. What do you do? Just hypothetically, you know. Come off it, Mike. The US has already answered this question. Europe can just look here for the problems and some answers. Jon
From: Michael A. Terrell on 16 Oct 2006 21:25 Frank Bemelman wrote: > > "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht > news:bc77j2911rjokocse2qt39dr9brbjktce6(a)4ax.com... > > Just one more thing worth mentioning is that all those lost lives > > are deliberately attributable to Saddam Hussein's refusal to accept > > the UN's mandates and sanctions without question, which was part of > > the deal he never intended to follow in the first place. > > And Bush didn't bother about the UN either, or the opinion > of the UN inspectors. Seems he was all to scared about the > outcome of the final report, which was due in weeks. > > > And you're defending that pig? Shame on you. > > The US are the swines in this case, and it is a shame > that you defend your government. A bloody disgrace it > is. Look at yourself. And you are the slop we feed to the hogs. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: John Larkin on 16 Oct 2006 22:41 On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:37:22 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >"Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote in message >news:jul5j2tkh6tg8nptqgn390urkanmgjbng9(a)4ax.com... >> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:24:51 +0100, "T Wake" >> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >>>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>news:4532B1D6.86F08520(a)hotmail.com... >>>> >>>> T Wake wrote: >>>> >>>>> MAD only works when the parties are sane >>>> >>>> LOL ! What a brilliant concept. >>> >>>It was good while it lasted. At least with the US and USSR being governed >>>by >>>reasonably sane people, the prospect of nuking another country was almost >>>zero. Now, people are suggesting the US will go to war with a country >>>which >>>will have no way of properly defending itself without resorting to nukes. >>>If >>>NK does detonate any type of nuclear weapon against America, will the US >>>restrain its response? Will the American public allow the nations military >>>to continue to fight a conventional war? If I thought the US would invade, >>>I >>>would hope they would. (If that makes any sense). >> >> Actually, President Bush has explicitly kept the "nuclear option" on >> the table -- particularly, their tactical use. > >Sad really, isn't it. I was hoping I would be able to see my great >grandchildren. But it gets less likely. > Well, if you survive the next two years, you're over the hump. John
From: MooseFET on 16 Oct 2006 22:55
JoeBloe wrote: > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 08:05:58 -0300, YD <ydtechHAT(a)techie.com> Gave us: > > >And possibly due to domestic production currently being at a > >stand-still due to a lack of infra-structure. > > > The books I read in school were several years old. > > If they had books when we got there, they would still have them, > idiot. Unless they got looted or destroyed that is. |