 | | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) I don't think that's a fair extension. Bulletproof vests are *not* sold as a guarantee of protection, rather as an added margin of safety in given situations. The problem with missile-defence is precisely that which James and Dave pointed out: (...) (23 years ago, 1-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
"James Simpson" <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:GIy92A.9r3@lugnet.com... (...) With that logic, I'd expect you to next say that bulletproof vests on police officers invite criminals to shoot them. It is imperative to our national security (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) While I don't think Geordan knows what he is talking about, I do think that some of the Soviet diplomates did say at some point to American diplomates that they "feared he would fire the missles on the US as a renegade". This was to get the (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Dude, are you making this up as you go along?!? Their orders were to proceed north, and rendezvous with Tupolev's boat, where they would conduct drills with the caterpillar drive. Then they were to return to Polyjarny (sp?). Captain Raimus (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) I think that "police actions" are birds of two different feathers: 1) Those with a clear moral imperative - Rwanda comes to mind. Oh wait. We just watched the massacre happen. Never mind. 2) Those "police actions" that are really calculated to (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Yeah I worded that wrong (...) Oh! your right! they were only testing, the intention was to later destroy NY on a dif. mission, sorry. -Geordan- (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Yeah, sorry, they were only testing the catepillar, the sub WAS created though for the purpose of destroying a US city (...) And the entire crew on Tupolev's boat... and had he had his (...) right, the US would just be intimidated. At (...) (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) If anything, I'd say that this reinforces a point that Eric made, at least by example. That point being that a strong military is useful in deterring other nations from attacking yours, but speaks nothing as to whether or not your nation will (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Which is exactly why that foolish missile-defense nonsense is so dangerous. We're liable to create just the right conditions for a nuclear "incident" with this money-sink, er, national defense system. This whole issue just makes me sick to (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Did I see a different film? I thought the "caterpillar" was the propulsion system, rather than a weapon... Anyway, I don't really recall Ramius being ordered to destroy NYC, but it's been awhile. Dave! (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Wait a sec... What? Now I'll admit it's been a while since I've seen the movie, but weren't they just testing the caterpillar technology? I don't think there were any plans at all about using any weapons on the US. (...) Well-- 1st off, that'd (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) And I agree 120% with Mladen, Ever seen the movie "The Hunt For Red October"? (the best movie ever) The red october's orders are to destroy new york with their new silent "catepillar" technology. The orders to use the weapons are from the (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we doing the right thing?
|
|
(...) Follow ups to off-topic.debate. I was going to say the same thing... Germany sure didn't show any hesitation to use their vastly supperior army in WWII, nor did the Romans hesitate to us theirs, or the British durring colonial expansion etc. (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Not to speak for Lar, but I think the association for him was insofar as in communist governments that have existed, there is always a central dictating body which applies "equality" to the citizens (theoretically themselves too, one could (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Emergency! Everyone, please read this.
|
|
(...) A) Because I do believe that it impacts the community, whether you (or Todd) likes it or not. B) Because, as I stated, I don't like the business practice -- and I am aware in this instance of something that might possibly be done about it. (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Look at it this way. You claim communism is "immoral" due to what you term "slavery and theft". Yet, my understanding of communism leads me to understand that it provides shelter, education and healthcare based on need. The system you favour (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Silly Larry! Of course there is! The more happiness resulting from an action there is, the more moral that action is, and visa versa, says utilitarianism. Actually, I associate utilitarianism first and foremost with its view on ethics... (...) (...) (23 years ago, 31-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I agree, but are you equating Communism-- that is to say the essential notion or theory of Communism/Socialism, not the current or former attempts at it-- with slavery? Slavery is the anti-thesis of Communism (and even Democracy) and therefore (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Emergency! Everyone, please read this.
|
|
(...) Yes, he indicated this in very clear language. (...) Why then, if you know the story as far as Todd tells it, would you want to make such an offer? (...) Again, your own words don't really jive with your offer of money. Why help Todd rescue a (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) But I'm not using utilitarian morality (were there such a thing, which there isn't) here. My argument has several legs, each should be evaluated independently. The utilitarian argument (which makes no reference to morality) is entirely (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
