 | | The beginning of the end of NATO?
|
|
This is awesome news... not only might this little war we're about to have finish up the UN as an active force, it might well do in NATO too. From the text of a speech by Senator John McCain (R., Ariz.) on February 8, 2003, at the Munich Conference (...) (22 years ago, 12-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) Chris wasn't saying the relationship is not propery. He was saying the contract is not a property, it is documentation of the agreement of what property is involved in the relationship and how to handle disolving the contract. Chris also added (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Capitalism (was: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Hmm, if land is not a good, then what rules should govern trading it? If you always have a right to some land as part of your right to exist, then what stops you from "selling" your land, and then demanding a land grant because you're now (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) I would agree with this refinement. It also better supports the idea that the wife terminating the relationship is different than a murderer terminating the relationship. (...) Right, it's not so much that the value of the relationship (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) No. There may be an agreement, but Frank said clearly in (URL) that "The relationships that make a family a family are property". The example of marriage may also have a contractual element which may also have value, but according to Frank's (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) Small world. My family had a dog named Taffy when I was a child. Also, don't worry about becoming crotchety at 35. When I was 21 I was always telling my dorm mates to turn down their music. And I'm sure that if I had had a lawn I would have (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | astonishingly light? [Re: Its about time someone put this concept in print.]
|
|
(...) I can't see the wood for the trees! I found this page: Afghanistan War Produces High Civilians-Killed-Per...mb-Dropped Ratio (URL) passage: ==+== After surveying numerous reports on civilian impact deaths caused by bombing, I estimate the (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I agree with Frank on this point. The contract isn't exactly a property (well, the paper and ink are, and the IP that goes into it may be, but the contract in the sense that Frank means is merely an agreement. The agreement itself (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) Why would the value of the relationship change depending on who took it away? Do other pieces of property change their value depending on who takes them away? (...) I don't think that matches with what you've said earlier: you declared the (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) I would say yes. To some extent this is already covered by divorce law. I'm pretty sure I've also read about cases where someone sued their ex for basically this reason. I'm not sure one would win very often, but there certainly are cases (...) (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) So if my wife wanted to end our marriage, I should be able to sue her for loss of my relationship 'property'? Richie (22 years ago, 11-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Capitalism (was: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) I think that one must agree to either: a) because people have a right to exist somewhere, space/volume/area/land is not a good in the normal sense and we have to figure out what it is and how we handle it, or b) because space/volume/area/land (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) The box is already open. This proposed law is just reminding us that it is open. But we don't want to close it. Lawsuits are the civilized way of settling disputes. (...) But what basis do you use to hold the cat thrower responsible for his (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) No addendum needed, and mostly the system is already there. Judges do have a lot of flexibility. Unfortunately, over the years they have been given less flexibility. Also, countersuits already handle some of the problems. Mostly what has to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes: <snip> (...) Now if there was an addendum to all laws that says "You will get slapped hard if we find that your lawsuit is frivilous", then I'm completely in support of said measure. However, who deems (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) Fundamentally, I see no problem whatsoever in animals having and being given property rights. As to what happens to the estate when Fido dies without issue? What happens when your kid who inherited your estate dies without issue? We have (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Capitalism (was: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) I agree that existence is a property right (and truly the most fundamental one). This does imply a right to a place to exist. However, assuming that the resources of the universe are limited, clearly one doesn't have an unlimited right to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) And I'm pointing out that we live in society more and more intent on a "Sue or be sued" mentality. So I was around 11 years olf. We had a dog named Taffy. Taffy was a wonderful dog who came to a very unkind end when some construction material (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
(...) half measure. It is still true that only animals who have a steward that wants to push back will be remedied. So people can still throw flaming cats of highway bridges, as long as they're strays. (...) So you think that when a vet or a (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | WOMD [weapons of mass *deception*]
|
|
(...) Given that civilians were targeted in WW2, I don't see how the two can be compared? In Afghanistan, we had the ability to prosecute the intervention with far less civilian casualties [that fact that far less than 2,000,000 died is not a (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Idiots, Part Deux
|
|
Now right off the bat, my family loves animals--I'm anti-fur and a whole bunch of other things, and we always had a dog in the house when I was growing up--loved having a dog around, and we always treated our animals humanely. That said... (URL) (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dyslexia...and Men vs. Women
|
|
(...) There is a smallish school of thought that has uncovered some indications that dyslexia is caused by teaching kids to read before their brains are ready for the kind of symbolic decoding that is needed. In educational systems in which the kids (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dyslexia...and Men vs. Women
|
|
(...) There is a smallish school of thought that has uncovered some indications that dyslexia is caused by teaching kids to read before their brains are ready for the kind of symbolic decoding that is needed. In educational systems in which the kids (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Capitalism (was: People are idiots...)
|
|
Capitalism merely refers to an economic system in which the capital is controlled by private rather than public interests. All this "capitalists with a conscience" stuff is silly. (...) How do you figure? What you're discussing is either a matter of (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pure Capitalism and Property Rights (was Re: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Dunno. I haven't found one yet that wasn't. (Meaning either a putative right is a property right, or it isn't a right) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pure Capitalism and Property Rights (was Re: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Lots of interesting stuff there. Plenty of examples demonstrating that specific rights can be construed as property rights, but apparently nothing demonstrating it to be the case for all rights (but I could have missed it - there are, after (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Speaking of oxymorons ( Re: People are idiots...
|
|
good <-> Modern American History book Of course that's an oxymoron. (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Well, my good friend Larry, you are totally wrong here. Capitalism is nothing more than putting a price on everything, including the rights. Your definition of capitalism is idealized. On the other hand, socialism does NOT operate without (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Speaking of oxymorons ( Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Hmm... I know what is an oxymoron, but I don't really see how you can see it in my sentence. (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ture Capitalism and Property Rights (was Re: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Sure... (URL) 118 (1998) is the first place I think I use that phrase in this forum. (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Ture Capitalism and Property Rights (was Re: People are idiots...)
|
|
(...) Could you explain what you mean by 'all rights are property rights'? (...) Why? (Is it purely so capitalism will work?) (...) No respect for rights = socialism Respect for rights = capitalism ? No. If all rights are property rights then: (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Speaking of oxymorons ( Re: People are idiots...
|
|
Speaking of oxymorons... (...) there's one for you. (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Its about time someone put this concept in print.
|
|
(...) Just for the record, it's more like 22 million. And the central government has a fair amount of cash from oil income. (...) We aided him once he was already there, and it was more a case of we were trying to annoy Iran rather than aid Saddam (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Its about time someone put this concept in print.
|
|
(...) Well you are right on that point, Iraq will continue to struggle after this war. But come on, we can't compare Iraq and Germany. In the 1930', Germany was (and still is) already a powerfull industrial nation, one of the biggest in Europe. Iraq (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper writes: <snip> (...) In the West Wing this week, someone remarked that Republicans want a huge military and send them nowhere, whereas the Democrats want a small military and send them everywhere. I'd (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Journalists, medias, militaries and politicians (republicans at least) are idiots. Indeed, they all made loads of cash because of the 9-11 tragedy. As for the media, all they do is cash in on targedies, especially CNN. Misinformation is the (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Amen to that! Terry (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
I hate to go all "Frank Filz" on you, but isn't this actually on topic? Anyway, I have known women to roll their eyes at my interest in bricks, and women that have instead become intrigued by the idea of playing with them also. I think it just (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Its about time someone put this concept in print.
|
|
(...) probably (...) Actually it was the poor economic conditions that allowed Hittler to be 'elected' and then declare himself 'the leader.' Once he was in power it did not matter what the people wanted as they were slaves to the dictator. The (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Its about time someone put this concept in print.
|
|
(...) Very well written article laying out the issues of military involvement. But what it failed to cover was that Germany, b/w WW1 and WW2 was shunned by the world--there was a depression, and the expression 'taking a wheelbarrow load of money to (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello writes: Snip (...) Snip “I’m a girl and I like Lego” predictable I know but it is true. My degree is in physics and I was way outnumbered by blokes as an undergraduate. What I have notice about AFOLs though (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Its about time someone put this concept in print.
|
|
As of posting the article refers to the January 30th article. (It will probably get pushed to the "previous articles" section soon) (URL) from that the 'subject' says it all. -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) True capitalism is more than just supply and demand, it requires recognition of property rights. Selling stuff that you stole is just thuggery or fencing, not capitalism. (...) All rights are property rights. What is right is to respect them. (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) I don't think so - conscience could unnecessarily inhibit the free interaction of supply and demand. (...) Which rights would they be? How does 'Doing what's right' apply to true capitalism? What *is* right? Richie (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) No, actually it's an oxymoron. A true capitalist recognizes rights and doing what's right, and does so. (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Now that's a tautology! Richie (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
<mucho snippo> I do find your wife's research very interesting, but I would come to a very different conclusion. I have always fallen on the nature side of the nature/nurture arguement. I would argue that your wife's findings indicate what boys and (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
Something important, even if it does seem off topic: My wife did a study of children's greeting cards. She found that girl's cards emphasized beauty/prettiness, being sweet and nice, and used pastel colors like pink and other light colors. boy's (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) Or a true capitalist with no conscience. ROSCO (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More 'Classic' Lawsuits...
|
|
(...) Don't sue me I'm broke. I am pretty sure the retraining order is to block the school from posting the class rankings until the suit over the grades has been resolved. What will they think of next? William (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
(...) trips'... (...) As a father of two a girl and a boy, I have managed to raise two lego mainiacs. When I first started buying lego for my kids, I started out with a few of the now infamous blue tubs. At the time I bought the tubs, my daughter (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
I'm afraid I'm partially to blame. I added to the boy side of the equation by having a son. If I had a daughter, I would have helped correct the imbalance. :-) I know that sounds flippant, but it's mostly true. While my wife was pregnant, I walked (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | More 'Classic' Lawsuits...
|
|
(URL) sues board to get A+ instead of A in course. First, the last line mentions a restraining order--I didn't understand that part. Second, a few months back I mentioned an article where junior hockey player sues hockey league 'cause he wasn't MVP, (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
(...) This has definitely been something that has been addressed in many places. IIRC there have been several 'presentations'/'open discussions' on the matter at various events and whatnot. I think one issue is that Lego (as you implied) is a little (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
Well, there are two separate but interrelated issues. - Why do more boys play with LEGO toys than girls? - Why do more men play with LEGO toys than women? Some thoughts to contribute towards an answer: - LEGO is a "construction toy". There seems to (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Men vs. Women
|
|
(...) I don't know if it starts when we're young. Thank goodness my sister grew up with her brothers 'casue she was basically a 'tom boy' (old euphimism definging a girl who doesn't do 'girlish things'--archaic to be sure...) and she was with us in (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Men vs. Women
|
|
As I roam through the vast halls of this community that is Lugnet, I am continually struck with the fact that males members and participants tend to out number females by a very high margin. This is also reflected in the ratio of people that in our (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) Oooh, pistols at 10 paces! That'd be great. Maybe jousting--Bush in a suit of armour would be an interesting picture. Possible way of resolving all future issues--let the leaders (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Okay, I was just trying to force a reality check. Perhaps there is some other avenue open rather than war. (...) I don't see why it would be to the United States' advantage to have it any other way. This threatened unilateral action is a load (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) In my honest opinion--no--which is sad. But any force that invades Iraq should be under a mandate by a united coalition, not by the US. My prayers, however, are for peace. Dave K (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) This is absolutely correct (at least from the legalistic viewpoint). If the UN is to have any credibility, it must enforce its sanctions. If its sanctions are worthless, then the UN loses stature and encourages unilateral action. What the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I like to be shown that I'm wrong. It shows that I'm not so bogged down in my zeal to be right that I can actually say, "Well, I'm wrong--let's figure out what right actually is..." (...) Asked *and* answered--it's up to the UN to decide what (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I prefer the term "role model" (...) Do you think the world should respect the "freedom and liberty" of terrorists the way the US has treated Orlando Bosch: (URL) to the justice department in George Bush Sr's administration, Bosch had (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Let's face facts; the US has an appalling record when it comes to respecting UN resolutions. [I see nothing that makes me think that's about to change.] Because of that, and other issues, a lot of countries [and their populations [even the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Thanks for the link - I was curious as to what it actually said. Reading through it, no, we aren't in breach of it as far as I can tell, and all that we need prove is that Iraq is dragging its feet in any way. I understand many nations want (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes (after rearrangement): (...) I have given a link to it elsewhere in the thread... As with any text, it's subject to interpretation, and as with any resolution of a deliberative body, it's couched (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: \>Again, demeaning the point of the other side by belittling it with terms (...) Would the (alleged) US violation have any meaning without the Iraqi (alleged) violation? Further, you didn't answer (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Of course we look out for our own interests-- anyone who claims they don't look out for theirs as well is a liar. (...) I don't recall making that assertion (because I didn't). (...) Because "international law" doesn't respect freedom and (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | International Law and Enforcement
|
|
(...) This is a real interesting question to me. How do we extend the concepts of law in the US to the rest of the world? If we say that no non-US citizen has the right to enforce anything on us, then we similarly have no right to enforce anything (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) It did its job? Was its "job" to find evidence of material breach [and so allow the war to start] or disarm iraq and avoid war? I know what I'd like it to do. Scott A (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) The last round of inspections were not without their "problems". Despite that, the achievements are still remarkable. Some highlights: 1. Removal of significant amounts of weapons usable nuclear material. 2. Accounted for 817 of 819 missiles (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Welcome to the moral high group; it's more crowded than you think. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
More misdirection. Herewith is a link to 1441 (one of many out there) full text. Go read it. (URL) resolution REQUESTS assistance from member states in providing info on Iraq's non compliance. It makes no statement about what happens if they decline (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Since rants often go on tangential tirades, well, sorry 'bout that. But I wouldn't call it 'misdirection', I'd call it 'selective reading' on the part of the US. (...) And now that Powell has conclusively proven that the US is in breach of (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
I snipped a BUSHEL of irrelevant misdirection. This is a question about 1441, not the US second amendment or anything else (...) OK, then, David. Stripped of all the other non topical stuff in your post, you concede that Iraq is in material breach (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Seriously, are you really that obtuse? Do you really think the US *wants* war??? We want 1) prove that Iraq has been disarmed of WOMD, and 2) Saddam deposed. That's *all*. Unfortunately, it will probably take war to accomplish that. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) The credibility of the UN is being destroyed by the rhetoric from Bush/Blair. (...) I agree. I'd have given more credence to Powell's little performance if Jr had not been itching bomb Iraq for most of his “presidency”. Did Powell show the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) As your own country's history shows, anti-Semitism, ethnic cleansing, genocide and racial/ethnic/religious intolerance is not a uniquely European experience. Zionism was an established philosophy well before WW2 and some form of Jewish (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I think whatever point you may have had in mind was lost in your wording. If you wish to speak of people in the US dieing because of a 200+ year old internal document, you have left the arena of international law and diplomacy. Be that as it (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) My point, parenthetical to be sure, is that "Oh we'll uphold a document written a long time ago--every jot and tittle--but a UN sanction (the US being one of the founding members of (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I think Bush will be quite happy to see Saddam ousted from within. He also may be amenable to seeing him accept voluntary exile. But Bush has decided for whatever reason that he wants Saddam gone, and has no problem with the war route (ah, for (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) Well, I'm not sure of the exact section (think 10) of 1441 paraphrased -- any country with info of WoMD must turn over that info to the inspectors for confirmation... I'd say that's (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) No, sorry, don't buy it. We do not have an obligation to turn over intelligence to the UN if that intelligence is going to be immediately leaked to the Iraqis and if, further, doing so is going to compromise the sources (remember what that (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) My point was, as some folks pointed out in rebuttal to Powell's presentation, is that the US should turn over info to the inspectors. Yes the Iraqis should do more to accomodate the inspection process, but just by showing us that the US had (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Like I said, it's leaked. The US decided to present it anyway. From commentary on today's presentation by Powell: (URL) ... it's true that there was no single moment like that (Adlai Stevenson smoking gun): rather, there were several of them. (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) Of course it is, but it is pure luck on their part that they are placed there. Assuming that this where their wealth derives it has not come from their ingenuity or their political system. (...) I tend to think there is a link but that you (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: competition
|
|
(...) My guess is: 1) Zoning. Most major stores are zoned such that they can only be put up in a particular area. Hence you know that often such stores will at least appear in the same vicinity. 2) Competition. Most likely there are a good mix of (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: People are idiots...
|
|
(...) I agree. But I'm not one bit surprised. ;( BTW: Who is the bigger worry: the buyers or the sellers? I expect at least some of the parts for sale will be “Ford” rather than “NASA” ;) (...) Indeed. In a way this is different to those who were (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: competition
|
|
(...) While i'm probably not anymore skilled than you, I'd gather a guess that confidence is a huge motivator in such decisions. If one can supply the same product more cheaply; chances are, a few years down the road; only one will remain. (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) There are two other indicators that can be of help here: the "age pyramid" (dividing the population in classes of 5 years), and the "Active-to-passive" ratio. This last one takes into account the contribute of the immigrants to the society, (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes: <snip> (...) I can't remember the day, but I was watching "live, on television" when the world broke 5 billion folks. They had this counter going up like a Lotto or something... Like wow, we have 5 (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) In my utterly limited study of dynamic systems analysis, I remember several examples (most of which I forget the specifics of, tho remember the jist) where the 'gut reaction' was to help people/societies/etc by giving money/aid/etc, which just (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | People are idiots...
|
|
(URL) gist--idiots were selling supposed fragments from the Columbia on eBay. Yes I said idiots. Whether they're actual fragments or not, it would take an idiot to cash in on this tragedy. Sometimes I wonder about the intelligence of some members of (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) Nope, I sure don't. I am not keen on Ponzi schemes. (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: namecalling
|
|
(...) Hey =>Bruce<=, even a Mac User knows that! :-) Any CPU using running Windows with an Intel chip. (But don't ask me what a CPU is;-) JOHN (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | competition
|
|
Maybe someone more skilled in business practices can help me answer these questions: Why do companies that sell similar products (especially big box stores like Walmart/Kmart or HomeDepot/Lowe's) typically build stores right across the street from (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) No, Hong Kong is a city and a Special Administrative Region OF China. The British handed the territory over to Chine, they did not grant it independance. Perhaps you're thinking Singapore? (...) Again, it's a city. Any comparison can be made (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 1776 and all that [was Re: namecalling]
|
|
(...) I think you mean Britain. (...) My American History is not great, but I'm pretty sure only a minority of the American-Settlers thought that *Britain* was a Tyrant and so chose to “revolt”. Further, their WoI would not have taken the path it (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) is (...) Hong Kong is the name of the city AND the country. (...) OK I will agree that the example is obviously distorted in favor of Williams' argument, however that still doesn't explain the country of Hong Kong's success despite its (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Poverty myths?
|
|
(...) Hong Kong is a city - it can't be compared to an entire country. Of which it is a part of, BTW. And I said OVER half of China is uninhabitaBLE, not uninhabitED - the last portion is even greater than the first. If you check where the majority (...) (22 years ago, 2-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
