New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Ken Smith on 7 Aug 2006 09:44 In article <37bcd2la83n862vmvgkher4i96vetnasu7(a)4ax.com>, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: [... stuff ...] >I agree. We should never have brought the Poliomyelitis vaccine or >the transistor to light. The US has invented many things benifited others. The "pet rock" helped out the workers in a gravel quarry in China. :) -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: John Fields on 7 Aug 2006 09:57 On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:51:59 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006 11:03:25 +0200, "Frank Bemelman" >> <f.bemelmanq(a)xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote: >> >> >"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht >> >> >> --- >> >> Do you want us to lose? >> > >> >No, just want the US to realize what they have caused by going in >> >on their own, neglecting the UN's advice to wait a tiny bit longer. >> >> --- >> I we'd taken the UN's advice we'd _still_ be playing their waiting >> game. > >Would there be anything wrong with that ? --- First you announce your plans to invade and then you announce your plans to postpone the invasion? That's patent idiocy which can only lead to greater loss of life on both sides. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: Ken Smith on 7 Aug 2006 09:57 In article <1154902999.511383.103530(a)75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: [....] >What I said was that the Iraki people would presumably be marking their >ballot papers with >"neither of the the above" - which is to say that they may have >ballots, but they don't have acceptable choices. ..... and this differs from England and the US how? Check out the choices both have been forces to select between. The trick is to make the central government weak enough that they only are considered annoying. Unfortunately, the US seems to be trying to make a strong central government. This isn't likely to work for them. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Ken Smith on 7 Aug 2006 10:00 In article <iVEBg.5463$uo6.1336(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: [...] >Maybe, maybe not. We did unseat Saddam, an explicitly stated military goal, >accomplished. As soon as Saddam was found the US should have said "Ok we're done. We're leaving". People would have demanded that the US stay resulting in a very different dynamic than what we've ended up with and a clear victory. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Ken Smith on 7 Aug 2006 10:07
In article <s6ABg.1685$1f6.1007(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: [....] >You have made a false assumption; the IRA was amenable to reason, Hezbollah >is not. I think you may be assuming too much about Hezbollah. It is to their advantage to appear crazy and extreme. They get there funding because of it. I'd bet that if they started talking about a settlement, they loose their funding. The real problem is that there is a bit of land that is way too important to jews, moslims and christians. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge |