No, that would still be you. I'm not talking about specifics when I mean war is a cycle. I'm talking about the big picture. There has always been wars going on, people retaliating to each other. It never stops, just look back into history and it's blatantly obvious.
In history it is blatantly obvious that evil men with evil intentions cannot be persuaded to stop carnage and death -- someone must rise and fight them. That means killing. And, I mean this, unfortunately innocents will be killed, too.
"Yes. Of course"? You really belive that it's OK to to kill innocent people?
Chalk the "of course" up to my nerves being frayed. I'm not a impassioned professional soldier. Anyway, sad to say, and I mean this, innocents will be killed in war. Especially when the opponent hides behind the civilians knowing our reluctance to kill innocents.
Also, you really think that some of the places in the Middle-east are going to be come pals with the western world, just cause the US fire a few missils into civilian buildings?
I don't care. Stopping the export of terrorism is the main goal. Stopping the support of terrorism would be good, too. Stopping the ideology of terrorism would be fantastic. Welcoming these terror-harboring countries into the world community of nations would be ideal.
Who are you standing for anyway? The govenments? or the people?
My government is of, by and for the people. You, AnarchoFreak, are an advocate of goverment of by and for yourself.
The thing is, the people that flew those planes into the WTC, belived that evil needed to be eradicated to. You are just like them.
Contrarily, I am nothing like them. I do not advocate killing civilians (admitting it will regretably occur is vastly different) and I do not advocate hitting non-military/infrastructure targets for terror purposes.
I stand on the side of the fallible righteous. We're not perfect but we are governed by conscience and principles.
I would turn this around and ask YOU how to stop the cycle? Or do you just hate America so much you hope we go down in the flames and are annihilated?
So then the US can attcak, and kill thousands of innocent people?
Yes. Of course.
Which means that the other side will retaliate back?
Some people just don't understand the whole visous cycle of war and conflict.
And that would be you. Ask Germany, Japan, Italy, heck, Britian about this cycle. War DOES change things. (My point is these four countries are great friends of the US today but at one time we fought them to the death).
person *wants* to die in war, because then he will rise directly to paradise, will live forever next to the prophet and will get seven virgins who fulfill all his wishes.
Then I believe we should help him along. The point isn't to make the person responisble to regret, it's to punish them for the act and stop them from commiting another.
Correction: those responsible are dead. They died attacking.
Nope. The ones RESPONSIBLE include the planners, promoters and sympathetic providers of aid to the same. It's not just retaliation (which is justified) but it's also stopping further acts by those responsible.
May your words, however, soon be true: "Those responsible are dead" -- Amen!
"Please Click YES to accept the new amendment to the Constitution of the United States of AmericaOnline"
At least it's still called America Online in other parts of the world; while the US is being replaced by a huge congolmerate so is the rest of the desireable earth.
Only the customer can get Management interested in quality. You can be as quality conscious as the allotted time allows, but that's it. Especially in today's marketplace -- there is little to no margin for navel gazing.
Now, if this bothers your conscience or you just prefer to not be associated with "good enough" work, do seek employment elsewhere.
If the client hasn't budgeted for overages due to quality assurance, your boss will ignore your pleadings.
This answers another question, "Why did the Bush administration stop the MSFT breakup?". The US needs a US-based OS monopoly to insert APIs like NSA_key, FBI_tap, Jenna_beer, etc.
With European governments wise to Echelon and MSFT's complicity with the US requests to make certain back doors...it would not be in the US's best interest to speed adoption of OSS software by breaking MSFT's stranglehold on competition.
While I'm stretching a bit, I don't doubt this is inline with the thinking in Washington (or would that be Virginia?).
ZENITH COMPUTER 1980'S MODEL. INCLUDES ZENITH MONITOR, DISKDRIVE, AND KEYBOARD. EPSON PRINTER. GOOD CONDITION.
Price? $100. Whoa.
Okay. This paragraph exists simply to weigh the lowercase text higher than the all caps text. I didn't write the all caps -- it's a quote. I could remove the all caps but that would mean modifying the original and losing some of the feeling - the impact - of the original.
>>Stallman, the Lenin to our revolution, is slowly fading into the background as senility and decripitude encroach on his ruling abilities. A Stalin, so to speak, must rise up to fill the power vacuum.
What a stupid analogy, using Lenin and Stalin! That system (the Soviet Communist one) was anything BUT free and open, which are the Hallmarks of GNU and Open Source.
Perhaps Stallman is the Yeltsin of this movement, but not the Lenin.;-)
. Heck, you can probably pick up an old 486 or Pentium laptop for the same amount as a bulky monitor/keyboard/mouse 'internet appliance' would cost these days.
Slashdot Mirror
I stand on the side of the fallible righteous. We're not perfect but we are governed by conscience and principles.
I would turn this around and ask YOU how to stop the cycle? Or do you just hate America so much you hope we go down in the flames and are annihilated?
Yes. Of course.
Which means that the other side will retaliate back? Some people just don't understand the whole visous cycle of war and conflict.
And that would be you. Ask Germany, Japan, Italy, heck, Britian about this cycle. War DOES change things. (My point is these four countries are great friends of the US today but at one time we fought them to the death).
Sometime evil just needs to be eradicated.
He said nothing .
Wrong. He said it all:
"We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them."
He doesn't need to speak, just act.
Leave. Don't return.
Yes, sad. But not ironic -- I think it's an intentional slap in the face of the Peace Accord.
Then I believe we should help him along. The point isn't to make the person responisble to regret, it's to punish them for the act and stop them from commiting another.
Nope. The ones RESPONSIBLE include the planners, promoters and sympathetic providers of aid to the same. It's not just retaliation (which is justified) but it's also stopping further acts by those responsible.
May your words, however, soon be true: "Those responsible are dead" -- Amen!
Thankfully, our Representatives will not be swayed by such spineless dribble. We will give the only rational response: Id, Locate, Eradicate.
Stay out of our way.
To promise retaliation is not hubris, it's appropriate.
Lameness
At least it's still called America Online in other parts of the world; while the US is being replaced by a huge congolmerate so is the rest of the desireable earth.
Hey, whatever happened to pithy wit?
Now, if this bothers your conscience or you just prefer to not be associated with "good enough" work, do seek employment elsewhere.
If the client hasn't budgeted for overages due to quality assurance, your boss will ignore your pleadings.
With European governments wise to Echelon and MSFT's complicity with the US requests to make certain back doors...it would not be in the US's best interest to speed adoption of OSS software by breaking MSFT's stranglehold on competition.
While I'm stretching a bit, I don't doubt this is inline with the thinking in Washington (or would that be Virginia?).
while you're at it, check out the guys other ads. Here's an Apple computer, vintage 1992, for $500.
Okay. This paragraph exists simply to weigh the lowercase text higher than the all caps text. I didn't write the all caps -- it's a quote. I could remove the all caps but that would mean modifying the original and losing some of the feeling - the impact - of the original.
Build it high-cost, go bankrupt, buy it cheap make it work. Please.
Which ignores the reality of dual-booting laptops. :-(
What a stupid analogy, using Lenin and Stalin! That system (the Soviet Communist one) was anything BUT free and open, which are the Hallmarks of GNU and Open Source.
Perhaps Stallman is the Yeltsin of this movement, but not the Lenin. ;-)
The above is all that in necessary to say on this subject, but due to the postercomment compression filter, I have to add this meaningless paragraph.
Much, much cheaper.
I won't be selecting "AMD" on 's CPU Type select box.
Spellcheck would have passed. What he needs is an EDITOR.