|
|
Random Nonsense / Geek Stuff All those random tech ramblings you can't fit anywhere else! |
Thread Tools |
10-13-2004, 01:11 PM | #76 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
"Kerry might have impress(ed) me if he would come clean like Clinton and tell people they have the wrong set of skills but I’m going to make sure you get the training you need and ensure you don’t loose your house."
to which the skeptic, looking at his record, would ask 'For how long will he hold that position ?' so sad that the presidency is a question of marketing, but we have a business driven society; this is the 'logical' result |
10-13-2004, 02:00 PM | #77 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
At lest it seems people are genially interested in their republic this election. |
|
10-13-2004, 02:15 PM | #78 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 365
|
A little levity..........
A teacher in a small Texas town asks her class how many of them are Bush fans. Not really knowing what a Bush fan is, but wanting to be liked by the teacher, all the kids raise their hands except one boy, little Johnny. The teacher asks Johnny why he has decided to be different. Johnny says, "I'm not a Bush fan." The teacher says, "Why aren't you a Bush fan, Johnny?" Johnny says, "Because I'm a John Kerry fan." When the teacher asks why, the boy says, "Well, my mom's a John Kerry fan, and my Dad's a John Kerry fan, so I'm a John Kerry fan!" The teacher is a little put out about all of this. After all, this is Texas, so she says, "What if your mom was a moron, and your dad was an idiot, what would that make you?" Johnny says, "That would make me a Bush fan." |
10-13-2004, 02:21 PM | #79 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
nice
recast in Mass . . . a Kennedy fan. |
10-13-2004, 02:56 PM | #80 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
psychofunk already stated he was a party guy
|
10-13-2004, 04:26 PM | #81 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
You can ship 40 foot containers into any number of major US ports (Seattle, Baltimore, etc) with a 99% assurity they will not be checked or scanned in any way. You can then load these containers onto trucks and drive them with near impugnity to anywhere in the continental United States. Four devices? New York Los Angeles Chicago Washington DC Which are you willing to sacrifice?
__________________
If not, why not? |
|
10-13-2004, 05:11 PM | #82 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
Kim Jong-il
|
10-13-2004, 05:28 PM | #83 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
As the asymmetric threat you have outlined….Checking every cargo container coming in to the country is impractical. The sad fact is that you and I will just have to live with the danger. This is a clear case where a good defense is a good offence….God Bless those Corsicans and their fine quotes. |
|
10-13-2004, 06:51 PM | #84 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 365
|
Quote:
|
|
10-13-2004, 06:54 PM | #85 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
Mutually Assured Destruction does not depend on equally armed powers - it merely reflects the concept that the best way to protect a population is to assure that any attack will be met with a comparative attack. While obviously the United States would not be using nuclear weapons against North Korea, the only way for a relatively small world power to make an equal strike against a major world power like the US would be to use Nuclear/Biological/Chemical Weapons.
If the US went into North Korea to oust Kim Jong Il, whether with conventional or Nuclear arms, their goal would be the destruction of the North Korean government. What would Kim Jong Il have to lose by striking a nuclear blow against the United States if he was already faced with a life in prison or a probable death sentence? MAD is often viewed in a Cold War mentality between two big superpowers, but the concept is ancient - war is avoided by the belief that what could be gained is not worth risking what would be lost. I'm not saying that every container entering the country can be checked - even if they were, nuclear weapons could still be smuggled in by boat, plane, via Mexico or Canada, etc. What I am saying is that invading North Korea when they have the deterrent of Nuclear Weapons is foolhardy at best.
__________________
If not, why not? |
10-13-2004, 10:10 PM | #86 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
BalefireX your description of MAD is dead wrong...look I will give you a flame pass because you are not a pro and likely too young to remember the cold war but at least learn the truth.
1. Robert McNamara former Secretary of Defense theorized MAD 2. Read the definition below Mutual assured destruction (MAD) is the doctrine of military strategy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by one of two opposing sides would result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender. It is based on the theory of deterrence according to which the deployment of strong weapons is essential to threaten the enemy in order to prevent the use of the very same weapons. The doctrine assumes that each side has enough weaponry to destroy the other side and that either side, if attacked for any reason by the other, would retaliate with equal or greater force. The expected result is an immediate escalation resulting in both combatants' total and assured destruction. It is now generally assumed that the nuclear fallout or nuclear winter would bring about worldwide devastation, though this was not a critical assumption to the theory of MAD. The doctrine further assumes that neither side will dare to launch a first strike because the other side will launch on warning (also called fail deadly) resulting in the destruction of both parties. The payoff of this doctrine is expected to be a tense but stable peace. The primary application of this doctrine occurred during the Cold War (1950s to 1990s) between the United States and Soviet Union, in which MAD was seen as helping to prevent any direct full-scale conflicts between the two nations while they engaged in smaller proxy wars around the world. Proponents of MAD as part of US and USSR strategic doctrine that believed nuclear war could best be prevented if neither side could expect to survive a full scale nuclear exchange. The credibility of the threat being critical to such assurance, each side had to invest substantial capital even if they were not intended for use. In addition, neither side could be expected or allowed to adequately defend itself against the other's nuclear missiles. This led both to the hardening and diversification of nuclear delivery systems (such as nuclear missile bunkers, ballistic missile submarines and nuclear bombers kept at fail-safe points) and to the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. This MAD scenario was often known by the euphemism "nuclear deterrence." (The term 'deterrence' was first used in this context after World War II. Prior to that time, its use was limited to juridical terminology.) In France, "deterrence" was translated as "dissuasion," and in Russia, it was translated as "terrorization" -- a linguistic difference which highlights two particular interpretations of deterrence: one which is basically an extrapolation of rational politics, another which is based on pure emotional fear. These two notions of deterrence, and MAD, were often used interchangeably by both fans and foes of the doctrine, despite their apparent paradoxical intent. ...these basic definitions should never be an issue in the information age, don’t be lazy |
10-13-2004, 10:12 PM | #87 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ashland
Posts: 296
|
I will vote for John Kerry. I think Bush is a danger to the world and my way of life. He has polorized the country and the world in a way that has never happened in the past. I enjoy traveling and honestly don't need any more anti american sentiment out there.
__________________
Air cooled my ass. |
10-13-2004, 10:15 PM | #88 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
I could reference nuclearfiles.org, which states:
"MAD reflects the idea that one's population could best be protected by leaving it vulnerable so long as the other side faced comparable vulnerabilities. In short: Whoever shoots first, dies second." It is a matter of interpretation, no need to be condescending about one's status or age - I certainly won't insult you because you feel differently about what is basically an issue of semantics. I don't think that you actually disagree with my point that it would be foolish to attempt to overthrow a government with nuclear weapons; instead you appear to be focusing on my word choice... typical internet debate technique.
__________________
If not, why not? |
10-13-2004, 10:42 PM | #89 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
I am not being condescending; you're just out of your depth. I don't think it would be foolish if you knew where the weapons were located. This is all really moot. North Korea has no energy. If we continue to cut them off and wait, they will continue to fall apart. What most people don’t realize is that more North Koreans will die from that policy vice war. |
|
10-13-2004, 10:53 PM | #90 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
Would destroying a major US city destroy the United States? No
Would that be an acceptable thing for the US Governement to risk? In my opinion, certainly not. You state that I am out of my depth, could you provide some facts to demonstrate your intimate knowledge of North Korea's nuclear weapons program or of Kim Jong Il's mentality? I am willing to discuss this in a friendly manner, as intellectuals, but not if you insist on insulting me at every step. Obviously you feel that North Korea lacks the capability or will to detonate one of its Nuclear Weapons in a US city if attacked, can you back this up?
__________________
If not, why not? |
10-13-2004, 11:32 PM | #91 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
|
|
10-13-2004, 11:45 PM | #92 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
I'm sorry, are you referring to http://www.foreignaffairs.org/ ?
If so, I would advise you against basing your judgement on any single news source. I tend to read a variety of news sources both US and International and then compare and contrast to fill in the blanks and remove what intentional or unintentional bias exists in all reporting. Either way, it doesn't seem that you want to discuss this further in an adult manner, so I'll drop it.
__________________
If not, why not? |
10-14-2004, 12:01 AM | #93 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ashland
Posts: 296
|
Bale this is totally off subject but what do you think of Blair, I have read that he is blaming bad intel on his decision to join the US in Iraq. I personally think he is full of it and he and Bush knew all along there were no WMD's in Iraq. Curious to see what you think since you are a bit closer to the issue.
__________________
Air cooled my ass. |
10-14-2004, 12:04 AM | #94 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
|
|
10-14-2004, 12:05 AM | #95 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ashland
Posts: 296
|
Wow Lothar way to be a dick
__________________
Air cooled my ass. |
10-14-2004, 12:17 AM | #96 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
You might be interested in reading some of the artciles by Philip Bobbit (Biography) which are avaliable on the web or pick up one of his books, as I think he has one of the more realistic and balanced views on the Iraq war and war in general. Unfortunately, the specific article I was going to link you to has wandered off the web, but I'll see if I can find it.
__________________
If not, why not? |
|
10-14-2004, 12:25 AM | #97 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Surf City USA
Posts: 433
|
Quote:
|
|
10-14-2004, 01:02 AM | #98 | |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Gatos, California
Posts: 58
|
Quote:
I can just see him sitting there... "And over here we have a silo, possibly used for grain or DEATH, and over here we have the new Optimus Prime doll with real laser-shooting action." |
|
10-14-2004, 07:57 AM | #99 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 414
|
Quote:
__________________
"Employ your time in improving yourself by other men's writings, so that you shall gain easily what others have labored hard for." --Socrates "greenman100 = obnoxious ass hole"-gazorp Last edited by greenman100; 10-14-2004 at 08:03 AM. |
|
10-14-2004, 08:33 AM | #100 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
Bx, cs
you are ignorant, citing the bleating of other sheep is not 'intellectual' L5 is a military professional, he cannot say many things (not that you 2 would believe anything you chose not to anyway) I was in the military in the '60s, and McNamara caused me to remain in a while longer. You guys lack perspective. L5s MAD description is correct. but DO continue to post, you are proving how limited is your knowledge semantics ? yea, why not reduce to to the arraignment of characters ? yarrow stalks ? |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|