New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 2 Aug 2006 15:27 John Woodgate wrote: > In message <44D0F11D.2F4CEEDB(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, dated Wed, 2 Aug > 2006, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> writes > > >I don't delude myself that wars are simply going to go away but those > >who think they can resolve conflict by engaging in war are likely to be > >disappointed > > War establishes the initial conditions for a political settlement. The > political settlement after Israel ceased to occupy the south of Lebanon > was clearly useless and dangerous, because it allowed Hisbollah to > fortify the south and launch the rocket attacks on Israel. > > Not unreasonably, Israel won't settle for a similarly useless and > dangerous political settlement this time. Would you? No I wouldn't. There are several practical options - all of which - if I were Israel, I'd expect to include an independent force of substance in Lebanon to monitor the situation and act effectively as a proxy Lebanese defence force.. I would expect the Palestinians to once again raise the issue of the occupied West Bank in return ! Graham
From: Eeyore on 2 Aug 2006 15:29 Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > John Fields wrote: > > On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 19:38:21 +0100, Eeyore > > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I see no reason to continue the bad practices of the past. I don't delude myself > >> that wars are simply going to go away but those who think they can resolve conflict > >> by engaging in war are likely to be disappointed > > > > --- > > Yes, I agree, but just like when you get attacked by a rabid dog, > > sometimes there's no choice but to put the dog down. > > > > Ideally, before he gets close enough to bite. > > Of course, the actual problem is Baby George smashing his way into other > peoples gardens and trying to put their dogs down because he has a > rabies phobia. Nice analogy ! And you see yourself more to the right it seems too ? Graham
From: John Fields on 2 Aug 2006 15:36 On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 20:12:36 +0100, John Woodgate <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In message <u6t1d2pp82griqp2q4rt96eukqpr6ihcb7(a)4ax.com>, dated Wed, 2 >Aug 2006, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> writes > >>Somehow, I got you confused with "tapwater". > >You can't tell the difference between a fictitious stuffed donkey and >tap water? (;-) --- It's difficult because one is a burro and the other sometimes comes from a burrow. (Hopefully _not_ from a burro...) -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: John Fields on 2 Aug 2006 15:43 On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:18:49 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >John Fields wrote: >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 19:38:21 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> John Fields wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 18:06:53 +0100, Eeyore >>>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It's pretty clear that a large percentage of the US think that the only answers >>>>> come out of the barrel of a gun. >>>> --- >>>> What's abundantly clear is that milquetoasts like you don't >>>> understand Teddy Roosevelt's "Speak softly and carry a big stick." >>>> and think that bluster, bravado, and braggadocio will save the day. >>> I understand it *perfectly* thank you. I'm entirely in favour of the UK maintaining >>> its nuclear deterrent for exactly that reason. >>> >>> >>>> I don't think there's a single country that hasn't drawn its borders >>>> in blood and maintained them by force of arms, >>> I see no reason to continue the bad practices of the past. I don't delude myself >>> that wars are simply going to go away but those who think they can resolve conflict >>> by engaging in war are likely to be disappointed >> >> --- >> Yes, I agree, but just like when you get attacked by a rabid dog, >> sometimes there's no choice but to put the dog down. >> >> Ideally, before he gets close enough to bite. > >Of course, the actual problem is Baby George smashing his way into other >peoples gardens and trying to put their dogs down because he has a >rabies phobia. --- Not at all. In that instance, Mr. Bush decided that it was time to call in the dog-catcher and go after a particularly rabid mongrel who had been on the loose for far too long. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 2 Aug 2006 16:21
Eeyore wrote: > > Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > >> John Fields wrote: >>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 19:38:21 +0100, Eeyore >>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I see no reason to continue the bad practices of the past. I don't delude myself >>>> that wars are simply going to go away but those who think they can resolve conflict >>>> by engaging in war are likely to be disappointed >>> --- >>> Yes, I agree, but just like when you get attacked by a rabid dog, >>> sometimes there's no choice but to put the dog down. >>> >>> Ideally, before he gets close enough to bite. >> Of course, the actual problem is Baby George smashing his way into other >> peoples gardens and trying to put their dogs down because he has a >> rabies phobia. > > Nice analogy ! > > And you see yourself more to the right it seems too ? http://theconsensus.org/uk/introduction/index.html Dirk |