Perhaps my comments are off-topic but I strongly think that mankind should not colonise other planets or moons that have life or even potentially develop life. I have a dim view of human nature. We will never coexist peacefully for long with other life-forms before we start to subjugate or use them as food. Even if we manage to stay peaceful, our very presence will contaminate the alien biosystems. If we must leave Earth, then we should only settle on asteroids, man-made space stations or perhaps completely sterile moons. What right have we to shape the universe into our own paradise?
I think the "The US does it" is a good excuse as any. Implicit in the argument is that the United States government is always rational. The debacle in Iraq have shown that the US can be as irrational as any other pariah state, which is even more dangerous given the US military strength. In all probability, the US did not develop weapons to counter the Soviet space weapons not because it is rational, but for budgetary reasons. Lets call a spade, a spade. The US is against Iran having nuclear weapons because it hates Iran, for a lack of better word. If the US is truly against nuclear proliferation, it should also impose sanctions on Israel for having nuclear weapons.
Gee whiz. So you make the aircraft more difficult to hijack. So what. The terrorist will then target the airports. And when you make the airports tougher to attack, they will plant bombs in the airport carpark etc. Eventually, you can't get out of your own home without being strip-searched. So, you might as well just start walking around naked just to save time. Bend over, America.
In Soviet Russia... (according to Viktor Suvorov), all military equipments were designed so that the most illiterate peasant conscript can use it with minimal training. If faced with chossing between a complex system that works 100% but requires delicate maintenance or a simple system that only works 80%, but is easy to use and maintain, Soviet designers will choose the latter. Then again, to the Soviets, human lives are a renewable commodity. In any case, for the military, the simplest and most fault tolerant solutions is always the best.
Umm , let me see. Israel have wiped Palestine off the map. America is in the process of wiping Iraq off the map (through balkanization). So by track record, we should fear Israel and America more? And another thing. I find it futile to argue over the internet and even in the real world with anyone. No matter how many keyboards you wear out, you are not going to change someone's opinion. And do you think that our governments are going to listen to us? Lets face it. No matter what brand of politics your 'leaders' profess, they will put their own personal self interests first. So stop the spittle fight and enjoy the funny comments.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps my comments are off-topic but I strongly think that mankind should not colonise other planets or moons that have life or even potentially develop life. I have a dim view of human nature. We will never coexist peacefully for long with other life-forms before we start to subjugate or use them as food. Even if we manage to stay peaceful, our very presence will contaminate the alien biosystems. If we must leave Earth, then we should only settle on asteroids, man-made space stations or perhaps completely sterile moons. What right have we to shape the universe into our own paradise?
I think the "The US does it" is a good excuse as any. Implicit in the argument is that the United States government is always rational. The debacle in Iraq have shown that the US can be as irrational as any other pariah state, which is even more dangerous given the US military strength. In all probability, the US did not develop weapons to counter the Soviet space weapons not because it is rational, but for budgetary reasons. Lets call a spade, a spade. The US is against Iran having nuclear weapons because it hates Iran, for a lack of better word. If the US is truly against nuclear proliferation, it should also impose sanctions on Israel for having nuclear weapons.
Did you guys see the photo on the article? It looks like three of guys are pissing out of the window while the rest seems amused about it.
Gee whiz. So you make the aircraft more difficult to hijack. So what. The terrorist will then target the airports. And when you make the airports tougher to attack, they will plant bombs in the airport carpark etc. Eventually, you can't get out of your own home without being strip-searched. So, you might as well just start walking around naked just to save time. Bend over, America.
In Soviet Russia... (according to Viktor Suvorov), all military equipments were designed so that the most illiterate peasant conscript can use it with minimal training. If faced with chossing between a complex system that works 100% but requires delicate maintenance or a simple system that only works 80%, but is easy to use and maintain, Soviet designers will choose the latter. Then again, to the Soviets, human lives are a renewable commodity. In any case, for the military, the simplest and most fault tolerant solutions is always the best.
Umm , let me see. Israel have wiped Palestine off the map. America is in the process of wiping Iraq off the map (through balkanization). So by track record, we should fear Israel and America more? And another thing. I find it futile to argue over the internet and even in the real world with anyone. No matter how many keyboards you wear out, you are not going to change someone's opinion. And do you think that our governments are going to listen to us? Lets face it. No matter what brand of politics your 'leaders' profess, they will put their own personal self interests first. So stop the spittle fight and enjoy the funny comments.