I too have a mild degree of respect for the insurgents and have often thought of them WRT our history (I too am in the US), however, do you think they are cognizant that the sooner they settle down, the sooner we leave? Do you think that is actually the case (I have cause for some doubts about that, but I like to think that is King George Jr.'s goal), that as soon as the insurgents stop killing people daily, we will pull out our troops (well, okay, I would be foolish to think we wouldn't leave behind bases, we do that everywhere to make sure we can stick our noses in places they don't belong)?
I'd say they most definitely do not believe that if they settle down we will leave. I'll even go so far as to say they probably think that settling down would encourage us to stay longer. That said, I was against this war from the beginning, even when I thought they might have WMD, and what I'm seeing now is that the only reason we want out is because of the insurgents.
At this point in time I think that if the violence died down to a low but controlable level and the "democratic government" (whether they were truely democratic or not) took over, Bush would declare victory and pull the military out of there so quick it would make your head spin. But, again, this is because of the insurgency and not despite it.
Also, as far as most Iraqis are concerned, leaving bases is having troops in the country. The insurgents sure as hell won't settle for that.
I don't know what people you have been talking to, but no one I know thinks that. My parents are damn close to retirement age and they expect did not plan on having SS be their retirement fund.
It isn't as if you get a lot of money anyway, just enough to live, sometimes barely.
The real question is when people are going to realize that in a world of Multinational Corporations, unions need to be multinational as well. If tech people around the world actually stood together then all of them would be better off.
The IWW is a decent model. The best part is that they never use union dues for political contributions.
As much as I hate the term, blogs seem to be an opening manifestation of this. Just like there are a whole lot of people out there who can write but, up til now have had no method of publishing, there are a lot of really amazing ideas out there that just plain never get heard or implemented. Open source has changed that a bit, but I expect it to start snowballing sooner rather than later.
We're talking about it because they went and said something along the lines of "hey, we don't mind gay people in our guild and won't be assholes to them."
Except they said it as "GLTB-friendly"
And, god forbid, they made sure people knew this, in public.
And that would be the point of a gay-friendly guild. People not talking about fag and ghey all the time. Because most of the time when people say they don't want sexual orientation to enter into the picture it means that they would like to assume everyone is straight. Not knowing you i can't say that this applies to you specifically, but the vast majority of the time this is the case.
Because the ice in the arctic is float it already displaces the same amount of water was it would if it were in liquid form. I.E. Because in both states the water has the same mass, the volume displaced by the ice caps is equivilent to the volume which would be displaced by liquid despite the difference in total volume.
Though I guess it would cause a slight short-term decline in the sea levels due to its cooling effect.
The primacy of the state over the individual. Or that is its identifying characteristic. There are othere things such as glorification of militarism, extreme nationalism and expantionism that are common denominators among fascist regimes. What most people call fascism is really totalitarianism.
MicroSoft was first prosecuted when Clinton was in office. The Bush Administration settled with MicroSoft for completely absurd, non-punitive terms. Something like, give 40 million in software to schools for free. Yeah, that'll break a monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
I too have a mild degree of respect for the insurgents and have often thought of them WRT our history (I too am in the US), however, do you think they are cognizant that the sooner they settle down, the sooner we leave? Do you think that is actually the case (I have cause for some doubts about that, but I like to think that is King George Jr.'s goal), that as soon as the insurgents stop killing people daily, we will pull out our troops (well, okay, I would be foolish to think we wouldn't leave behind bases, we do that everywhere to make sure we can stick our noses in places they don't belong)?
I'd say they most definitely do not believe that if they settle down we will leave. I'll even go so far as to say they probably think that settling down would encourage us to stay longer. That said, I was against this war from the beginning, even when I thought they might have WMD, and what I'm seeing now is that the only reason we want out is because of the insurgents.
At this point in time I think that if the violence died down to a low but controlable level and the "democratic government" (whether they were truely democratic or not) took over, Bush would declare victory and pull the military out of there so quick it would make your head spin. But, again, this is because of the insurgency and not despite it.
Also, as far as most Iraqis are concerned, leaving bases is having troops in the country. The insurgents sure as hell won't settle for that.
That said, it's the most life-efficient war in world history, if you don't count bloodless coups.
You mean, "if you don't count Iraqis."
But they don't count anyway, do they?
Probably RTFA, trying to figure out WTF 'Integrated Virtualization' means.
Hey genius, Socialism refers to an ECONOMIC SYSTEM.
So you are right Socialism != social democracy.
It's like saying that the US isn't capitalist, it's democratic.
If ever "that one corporation" owns pretty much everything, revolution will follow.
Would that be a revolution intended to deprive said corporation of its right to own property?
Now...people expect to retire and live on it...
I don't know what people you have been talking to, but no one I know thinks that. My parents are damn close to retirement age and they expect did not plan on having SS be their retirement fund.
It isn't as if you get a lot of money anyway, just enough to live, sometimes barely.
I'll see you a "manifestation" and raise you a "Web 2.0".
The real question is when people are going to realize that in a world of Multinational Corporations, unions need to be multinational as well. If tech people around the world actually stood together then all of them would be better off.
The IWW is a decent model. The best part is that they never use union dues for political contributions.
As much as I hate the term, blogs seem to be an opening manifestation of this. Just like there are a whole lot of people out there who can write but, up til now have had no method of publishing, there are a lot of really amazing ideas out there that just plain never get heard or implemented. Open source has changed that a bit, but I expect it to start snowballing sooner rather than later.
With rare exception, Gay-friendly organizations will also be non-bigoted.
Except maybe the religion part, but thats only when they are asshole bigoted religions.
We're talking about it because they went and said something along the lines of "hey, we don't mind gay people in our guild and won't be assholes to them."
Except they said it as "GLTB-friendly"
And, god forbid, they made sure people knew this, in public.
The nerve.
And that would be the point of a gay-friendly guild. People not talking about fag and ghey all the time. Because most of the time when people say they don't want sexual orientation to enter into the picture it means that they would like to assume everyone is straight. Not knowing you i can't say that this applies to you specifically, but the vast majority of the time this is the case.
Do they really need a guild that is inclusive of at least half the current userbase?
I'm not gay and I would join a gay-friendly guild.
You know why?
Because I would be more comfortable in a guild that is accepting of gays.
Why is this shit so hard for people to understand?
You have anything based on science.
Are they just giving away four digit UIDs these days?
Because the ice in the arctic is float it already displaces the same amount of water was it would if it were in liquid form. I.E. Because in both states the water has the same mass, the volume displaced by the ice caps is equivilent to the volume which would be displaced by liquid despite the difference in total volume.
Though I guess it would cause a slight short-term decline in the sea levels due to its cooling effect.
Nah, he'd just be modded down as a troll for posting in Greek.
Three: Two; One, Fight!
That would be 0.4mm a year on top of the other sources of rising sea water.
And assuming a constant, non-accelerating rate unlike what is currently being observed in greenland.
But good job trying to minimaze the problems we face today.
Yer both right.
And what does this prove?
While I don't support the democrats I have to drop a John Stewart quote here about their presense in the house.
"the Democrats have 49% of the vote and 3% of the power."
The primacy of the state over the individual. Or that is its identifying characteristic. There are othere things such as glorification of militarism, extreme nationalism and expantionism that are common denominators among fascist regimes. What most people call fascism is really totalitarianism.
MicroSoft was first prosecuted when Clinton was in office. The Bush Administration settled with MicroSoft for completely absurd, non-punitive terms. Something like, give 40 million in software to schools for free. Yeah, that'll break a monopoly.
How'd you like a nice glass of shut the fuck up?
Sorry, but the democrats are pretty much a sham party at this point; they won't, or can't, investigate anything.
Note: I am of neither party. Can't stand either of them.