New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 5 Aug 2006 22:12 In article <cb0ad2923ju5kg9kbq6ff8u9g1up9jqd0p(a)4ax.com>, phatbytestard(a)getinmahharddrive.org says... > On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 21:22:10 +0100, John Woodgate > <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> Gave us: > > >Well, maybe by 2040, but there are some real oldies still flying now. > >WW1 stuff. > > > "still in service" does not refer to "owned by some dude, and he > still flies it". It refers to still being in military service. > > There is an old wooden warship that is "still commissioned". > It follows the same line. USS Constitution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution > I guess I could have worded it better. -- Keith
From: bill.sloman on 5 Aug 2006 22:15 John Woodgate wrote: > In message <1154801057.855289.34900(a)i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, dated > Sat, 5 Aug 2006, bill.sloman(a)ieee.org writes > >Allende's government in Chile was - correctly - called a democracy, and > >you didn't find it sympathetic. > > It wasn't very, and it was stupid. Nationalising US companies without > compensation was not a brilliant move, was it? Obviously not, with hindsight. But since the U.S. claims to believe in the rule of law - not all that sincerely - they should have have gone to court rather using the CIA to foment a right-wing coup d'etat. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmenge
From: bill.sloman on 5 Aug 2006 22:21 John Larkin wrote: > On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 21:11:01 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >Frank Bemelman wrote: > > > >> "Bill Sloman" <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> schreef in bericht > >> news:44d34be9$0$2814$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> > > >> > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> schreef in > >> > bericht news:dp85d21r71jr2495asoedog49cp1kskcnk(a)4ax.com... > >> > >> >> In 1950, at the end of 1000 years of European domination of the world, > >> >> there were 22 democracies. By 2000, after a mere 50 years of evil > >> >> American hegemony, there were 120, by far the greatest number in > >> >> history. > >> >> > >> >> 120/22 = 5.4, a pretty serious factor. > >> > > >> > And you are counting Zimbabwe, Chile, Indonesia and Pakistan as > >> > democracies? > >> > > >> > How many of the new democracies are new nation states? Papua-New Guinea > >> > probably rates as a democracy in your book, but it does not score too well > >> > on any index of democratic function. > >> > > >> > In short, point us to your list of democracies - both the one for 1950 and > >> > the one for 2000. > >> > >> Does the actual number matter here? This is just one of JL's famous smoke > >> curtains, pretending as if the increase in democracies is an all American > >> achievement, for which the world - again - has to be thankful or something. > > > >Indeed. The USA probably contributed fairly insignificantly to that number. > > > > Well, then, what has happened in the last 50 years to produce such an > unprecedented change? The most powerful and richest country in the world claimed to be democratic and claimed that it liked to see democratic governments in other countries, so a whole lot of authoritarian and oligarchic regimes did a bit of window dressing and claimed to be democracies. It is called "fawning". Phat Bytestard makes a habit of it ... -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: bill.sloman on 5 Aug 2006 22:27 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:23:11 -0700, John Larkin > <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> Gave us: > > >On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 21:11:01 +0100, Eeyore > ><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >>Frank Bemelman wrote: > >> > >>> "Bill Sloman" <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> schreef in bericht > >>> news:44d34be9$0$2814$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >>> > > >>> > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> schreef in > >>> > bericht news:dp85d21r71jr2495asoedog49cp1kskcnk(a)4ax.com... > >>> > >>> >> In 1950, at the end of 1000 years of European domination of the world, > >>> >> there were 22 democracies. By 2000, after a mere 50 years of evil > >>> >> American hegemony, there were 120, by far the greatest number in > >>> >> history. > >>> >> > >>> >> 120/22 = 5.4, a pretty serious factor. > >>> > > >>> > And you are counting Zimbabwe, Chile, Indonesia and Pakistan as > >>> > democracies? > >>> > > >>> > How many of the new democracies are new nation states? Papua-New Guinea > >>> > probably rates as a democracy in your book, but it does not score too well > >>> > on any index of democratic function. > >>> > > >>> > In short, point us to your list of democracies - both the one for 1950 and > >>> > the one for 2000. > >>> > >>> Does the actual number matter here? This is just one of JL's famous smoke > >>> curtains, pretending as if the increase in democracies is an all American > >>> achievement, for which the world - again - has to be thankful or something. > >> > >>Indeed. The USA probably contributed fairly insignificantly to that number. > >> > > > >Well, then, what has happened in the last 50 years to produce such an > >unprecedented change? > > > Oh... wait a minute! He'll give credit to the terrorists for that > one! What a remarkably stupid prediction. What conceiveable reason would I have to make such a fatuous claim? Quite apart from the fact that "terrorists" become "freedom fighters" as soon as they win, so no "terrorist" is ever in a situation to enforce a democratic constitution. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: YD on 5 Aug 2006 22:38
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:59:03 -0500, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 20:59:18 +0100, Eeyore ><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>John Fields wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 03:58:14 +0100, Eeyore >>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > >>> >John Fields wrote: >>> > >>> >> On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:07:18 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax >>> >> <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >Interesting how hating Saddam made one a weak wimpy leftist back then, >>> >> >and hating him now makes one a strong rightwing patriot. >>> >> >>> >> --- >>> >> And what did hating the US make you back then, >>> > >>> >Probably considered vaguely irrational. >>> > >>> >> and what does it make you now? >>> > >>> >An increasingly popular opinion reflecting concern over the USA's inability to >>> >get the picture. >>> >>> --- >>> I asked what it makes _you_, not what popular opinion was, but no >>> matter. Since you seem to identify with popular opinion, I suggest >>> you're merely one of the sheep who is blindly caught up in a sheep >>> stampede, LOL ;) >> >>I was hard pressed to find a good description. You see I don't *hate* the US nor >>does anyone else I know. >> >>Exasperated about the USA would be more accurate. > >--- >Because we're conducting our affairs in ways of which you >disapprove, and while we're happy to take that into consideration, >in the long run we'll do what we want to. > >What I find incongruous is that so many of you all (Europeans, I >guess.) would rather turn a blind eye toward the middle east and let >Israel die than to help her. Why is that? > Possibly because in the long view Israel is rather insignificant, except as a regional US puppy. What have they contributed to world wealth and wisdom? - YD. -- Remove HAT if replying by mail. |