More accurately, Iraq's invasion of a major oil-producing country was the cause of the Gulf War--our motivation was purely selfish and economic. If the U.S. really subscribed to the just war theory, we would have intervened in Yugoslavia and Rwanda before they became bloodbaths of "ethnic cleansing".
Incidentally, the U.S. is the primary cause of the current mess in the Middle East. In the 1980s, the U.S. provided weapons and funding to Iraq to fight Iran, and to Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets.
Actually, the whole 'oil-producing' this is way overblown. Ultimately, it would have set a bad precedent and put Saudi Arabia at risk, but it was mainly about sovereignty. We know this because 1.) we didn't seize any oil fields in either Iraq or Kuwait and 2.) oil produces rose before and immediately after the war.
In the cases of Yugoslavia and Rwanda, they were/are both civil wars, not wars between sovereign nations. (Yugoslavia is very tricky in this regard, which is why it is ultimately, post-Tito, a 'civil' conflict, despite the breakups.) Curious fact: the Albanians who invaded Serbia, but were being 'ethnically cleansed' had their populations INCREASE during the 90's. Now how does THAT happen?
The US is NOT the primary cause of conflict in the Middle East. That distinction goes to Britain who ignored the Ottoman request for protection in WWI, forcing them to side with Germany and resulting in the split of the Ottoman Empire into the various faction states. This is especially true of the Sykes-Picot agreement for the splitting of 'Palestine', a previously unknown entity. Details can be found in
A Peace to End All Peace.
I understand about the arming of Iraq and Afghanistan, obviously the law of unintended consequences. Unlike the Soviets, we tended to give only enough so that we could defeat them later. The US is not alone in backing leaders who ultimately think it's THEM and not the US that's the cause of their power. See the dossier on Noriega if you still have questions.
But please, don't pin the Middle East, a region that's been in conflict since Alexander the Great's death on the US.
Because it's not only wrong, it doesn't make you sound smart.;-)
the USA is now, and always has been the root cause of Irish terrorism, just as it caused the Gulf War, created Israel and is trying to destroy Venezuelan democracy now
Some points:
British occupation of Ireland has been 'the root cause of Irish terrorism'. It's been going on since before the US was even a country.
Iraq's invasion of a sovereign nation, Kuwait, was the cause of the Gulf War. Did you guys stand aside while Argentina seized the Falkland Islands?
Israel was not created by the US, but by the UN. In fact, the effort was spearheaded by the British, in spite of the Sykes-Picot agreement.
Venezuelan democracy has been devastated by Hugo Chavez, an anti-American Socialist. When he was ignoring recall requests and the people's calls for elections, the US started to step in and got outrageous flak for it. Now the US is staying out of it and Hugo's death squads are working wonders, like they do for his buddy Fidel Castro.
So get your head out of your ass, and stuff your anti-American sentiment where the sun don't shine.
Fitting sentiment since the sun now daily sets on your so-called 'Empire' that we're still cleaning up after (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Middle-East).
Fucktard.
"We thought, 'How hard could it be to build an OS?' and scheduled 18 months to build NT. But we had forgotten about some of the important stuff--user mode, networking, and so on."
Just look at Canada, they are tremendously disadvantaged by geography compared to the US, but their parliamentary system seems to have produced a more livable society than the US'.
You ever think Canada's success might have more to do with the non-aggressive tendencies of the neighbor to their south, and the commensurate protections involved therein than it does with their socialist, populist parliament?
What is your beef with the U.S. Constitution. It's far from perfect, as is the government. However, it does effectively enable a continuous revolving revolution.
There is no hereditary Presidency. In fact, we've found that bastard degenarates can be President, in spite of their personal weaknesses.
I don't know where you find nepotism in the electoral college. Each of the seperate states has their say in how delegates are picked. The only time this changes is when the legislatures change it or, in the case of Florida, when their State Supreme Court thinks it should be a democrat.
Get off your high horse. It's great you've got it in for the U.S., but realize, most of us could care less. Leave us out of it and pay your bills when they're due.
Jackass.
I'd argue that the British Empire (remember that?) was just a wee bit more successful than the US.
Really. Without the Empire (and guys like Mark Sykes) we wouldn't have Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Beirut, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Depends on how you measure success. Personally, I think the Empire was an abject failure seeing as it ultimately FAILED.
The U.S., on the other hand, has no Imperial aspirations. In fact, we really couldn't care about other countries (you call it ignorance, we consider it apathy.)
Nevertheless we have to keep going abroad and fixing your messes (see Chamberlain, Neville).
You can get on your high horse, however, Monty Python and Black Adder are not enough to justify your imagined sense of cultural superiority.
A little OT, but this was around the same time (1983) that my dad said they'd never get disk drives that would be comparable (speed, amount of data, access times) to the storage capabilites of tape. All while playing around with an IBM PCjr with no hard drive and a whopping 128 colors!
Really? Is that why TR went after the Railroads even though they had done nothing wrong yet (other than not wanting to go under a standardized rate umbrella.)
There was nothing illegal in their activities, but TR went Trust-Busting. Standard Oil was next. Again, they did nothing wrong other than own the predominant market share.
Granted, abuse of position can happen when you're a monopoly, but simply BEING a monopoly is a no-no. That's why most capitalists HATE the law, because of its vague, arbitrariness.
Remember, TR was fighting what he felt was UNDUE influence and not any CRIMINAL activity. Big difference.
I think a lot of people here are applying the crime to the law and not realizing that the crime comes FROM the law.
Turns out a monopoly doesn't have to abuse it's power to be 'illegal' does it?
Your right, my argument was malformed. The abuse obviously follows the actual state of being in a monopoly (this is starting to sound like a Monty Python skit).
But if you read Sherman, et al. you'll find that monopolies are illegal because they COULD lead to abuse. This is what drove Rockefeller up a wall. He didn't actually DO anything illegal (not like create J++ out of Java or anything) and he still got pinched.
And finally, your second sentence sucked. It seems like you're arguing that MS has a monopoly because of a court finding and not because the actually have a monopoly.
Seeing as we're being all picky on semantics.
MS gives out IE for free, that's anti-competetive?
Boy. You don't even kind of get it, do you?
Giving away software isn't what makes MicroSoft a monopoly. Using their leverage as THE MAIN supplier of household Operating Systems to distribute this software, to the exclusion of others, with a toehold in the OS that other browsers will not have and then, ultimately, claiming that the browser is INEXTRICABLY intertwined with the OS -- all of these things are what make MS a monopoly.
Repeat after me: It's not giving away software, it's unfairly using an advantage and obstructing others that makes MicroSoft a monopoly.
I don't think most people would care if MS kept to standards, but that's another story.
they "sell off" their easiest asset to drop - the employees.
You can't 'sell' employees. Employees are a figurative asset, not a literal one. You can put them on your Schedule C. They don't appreciate or depreciate.
'Employees as assets' is a figure of speech. Do you understand that?
Most firms have a huge amount of slack between what they're paying for and what's getting done. And usually, there's a two to three employee cushion.
Just look at yourself. Are you posting during work hours? Or when you could be working?
And the end of your 'cycle' doesn't hold. When profits drop, shareholders want MORE costs cut. They sure as hell don't want to invest in more new employees. At least not here on Earth. Don't know about your planet.
Get some business books before you start talking about business cycles.
Re:It's gonna be a corporate giveaway this session
on
HomeSec In the News
·
· Score: 2
not the least of which I predict will be more goodies for Valenti & Co.
Jack Valenti of Hollywood? You think Hollywood has a friend in Republicans? Oh, that's right, Meathead and Babs and Alec Baldwin are all staunch Republicans.
What planet are you from?
Tried it. Didn't work. Repeatedly. (And unplugging and waiting for a good 30-60 seconds.) On a lark I decided to try the MAC cloning option and it worked. I've tested it at least twice since then. Same results. May give it another try again, but I already know what's going to happen. In fact, when they did their 'clampdown' on MAC addresses I was toast until I realized that the original MAC address I gave them had a wrong digit ('8' instead of a '3' or 'E'). Anyway, when I gave them the corrected number it fired up in a couple of hours. I think they vary it by location, but what a pain.
I put the parental block on HGTV, Lifetime and TLC after she started watching this crap and had me paint the whole fscking house.
I set the password to '1234'. She'll never figure it out...
Does their DHCP do auth based on the MAC address of the ethernet card or that of the DSL bridge?
If it's like my Cable Provider (ComCast), then it's the card. When I added my Router/Firewall, I had to spoof the MAC address. F**king stupid, if you ask me.
Now I have to keep that number handy FOREVER. However, I just gave the machine with the original card to my brother, who may get ComCast High-Speed and I'm kind of wondering what happens to him.
When I talked to Level 1 tech and told them that I changed the card, they either acted like they didn't know what I was talking about or really were clueless. I suspected the latter and gave up.
CNN tries to be balanced. They always have tried. They're probably a little left-leaning, but in recent years they've come muth further towards the center, often over-compensating and leaning to the right.
Slashdot Mirror
More accurately, Iraq's invasion of a major oil-producing country was the cause of the Gulf War--our motivation was purely selfish and economic. If the U.S. really subscribed to the just war theory, we would have intervened in Yugoslavia and Rwanda before they became bloodbaths of "ethnic cleansing". Incidentally, the U.S. is the primary cause of the current mess in the Middle East. In the 1980s, the U.S. provided weapons and funding to Iraq to fight Iran, and to Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets.
;-)
Actually, the whole 'oil-producing' this is way overblown. Ultimately, it would have set a bad precedent and put Saudi Arabia at risk, but it was mainly about sovereignty. We know this because 1.) we didn't seize any oil fields in either Iraq or Kuwait and 2.) oil produces rose before and immediately after the war.
In the cases of Yugoslavia and Rwanda, they were/are both civil wars, not wars between sovereign nations. (Yugoslavia is very tricky in this regard, which is why it is ultimately, post-Tito, a 'civil' conflict, despite the breakups.) Curious fact: the Albanians who invaded Serbia, but were being 'ethnically cleansed' had their populations INCREASE during the 90's. Now how does THAT happen?
The US is NOT the primary cause of conflict in the Middle East. That distinction goes to Britain who ignored the Ottoman request for protection in WWI, forcing them to side with Germany and resulting in the split of the Ottoman Empire into the various faction states. This is especially true of the Sykes-Picot agreement for the splitting of 'Palestine', a previously unknown entity. Details can be found in A Peace to End All Peace.
I understand about the arming of Iraq and Afghanistan, obviously the law of unintended consequences. Unlike the Soviets, we tended to give only enough so that we could defeat them later. The US is not alone in backing leaders who ultimately think it's THEM and not the US that's the cause of their power. See the dossier on Noriega if you still have questions.
But please, don't pin the Middle East, a region that's been in conflict since Alexander the Great's death on the US.
Because it's not only wrong, it doesn't make you sound smart.
Some points:
So get your head out of your ass, and stuff your anti-American sentiment where the sun don't shine.
Fitting sentiment since the sun now daily sets on your so-called 'Empire' that we're still cleaning up after (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Middle-East).
Fucktard.
"We thought, 'How hard could it be to build an OS?' and scheduled 18 months to build NT. But we had forgotten about some of the important stuff--user mode, networking, and so on."
Too funny.
Just look at Canada, they are tremendously disadvantaged by geography compared to the US, but their parliamentary system seems to have produced a more livable society than the US'.
You ever think Canada's success might have more to do with the non-aggressive tendencies of the neighbor to their south, and the commensurate protections involved therein than it does with their socialist, populist parliament?
What is your beef with the U.S. Constitution. It's far from perfect, as is the government. However, it does effectively enable a continuous revolving revolution.
There is no hereditary Presidency. In fact, we've found that bastard degenarates can be President, in spite of their personal weaknesses.
I don't know where you find nepotism in the electoral college. Each of the seperate states has their say in how delegates are picked. The only time this changes is when the legislatures change it or, in the case of Florida, when their State Supreme Court thinks it should be a democrat.
Get off your high horse. It's great you've got it in for the U.S., but realize, most of us could care less. Leave us out of it and pay your bills when they're due.
Jackass.
I'd argue that the British Empire (remember that?) was just a wee bit more successful than the US.
Really. Without the Empire (and guys like Mark Sykes) we wouldn't have Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Beirut, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Depends on how you measure success. Personally, I think the Empire was an abject failure seeing as it ultimately FAILED.
The U.S., on the other hand, has no Imperial aspirations. In fact, we really couldn't care about other countries (you call it ignorance, we consider it apathy.)
Nevertheless we have to keep going abroad and fixing your messes (see Chamberlain, Neville).
You can get on your high horse, however, Monty Python and Black Adder are not enough to justify your imagined sense of cultural superiority.
it's a space station!
(sorry. had to be done.)
Since we're doing ads, I have a forum that's dying for participation:
Brew-Masters.com
Thanks, slashdot. Next time, I'll post my free ad request as 'news' since the news I submit never gets posted.
Since we're doing ads, I have a forum that's dying for participation:
Brew-Masters.com
Thanks, slashdot. Next time, I'll post my free ad request as 'news' since the news I submit never gets posted.
It just shows that those who blithely put all Republicans into one stereotype are undereducated.
The correct term is: misunderedumacated.
Please get it right.
AmiPro. Best Word Processer Ever.
A little OT, but this was around the same time (1983) that my dad said they'd never get disk drives that would be comparable (speed, amount of data, access times) to the storage capabilites of tape. All while playing around with an IBM PCjr with no hard drive and a whopping 128 colors!
No, monopolies are illegal when abused.
Really? Is that why TR went after the Railroads even though they had done nothing wrong yet (other than not wanting to go under a standardized rate umbrella.)
There was nothing illegal in their activities, but TR went Trust-Busting. Standard Oil was next. Again, they did nothing wrong other than own the predominant market share.
Granted, abuse of position can happen when you're a monopoly, but simply BEING a monopoly is a no-no. That's why most capitalists HATE the law, because of its vague, arbitrariness.
Remember, TR was fighting what he felt was UNDUE influence and not any CRIMINAL activity. Big difference.
I think a lot of people here are applying the crime to the law and not realizing that the crime comes FROM the law.
Turns out a monopoly doesn't have to abuse it's power to be 'illegal' does it?
Your right, my argument was malformed. The abuse obviously follows the actual state of being in a monopoly (this is starting to sound like a Monty Python skit).
But if you read Sherman, et al. you'll find that monopolies are illegal because they COULD lead to abuse. This is what drove Rockefeller up a wall. He didn't actually DO anything illegal (not like create J++ out of Java or anything) and he still got pinched.
And finally, your second sentence sucked. It seems like you're arguing that MS has a monopoly because of a court finding and not because the actually have a monopoly.
Seeing as we're being all picky on semantics.
MS gives out IE for free, that's anti-competetive?
Boy. You don't even kind of get it, do you?
Giving away software isn't what makes MicroSoft a monopoly. Using their leverage as THE MAIN supplier of household Operating Systems to distribute this software, to the exclusion of others, with a toehold in the OS that other browsers will not have and then, ultimately, claiming that the browser is INEXTRICABLY intertwined with the OS -- all of these things are what make MS a monopoly.
Repeat after me: It's not giving away software, it's unfairly using an advantage and obstructing others that makes MicroSoft a monopoly.
I don't think most people would care if MS kept to standards, but that's another story.
they "sell off" their easiest asset to drop - the employees.
You can't 'sell' employees. Employees are a figurative asset, not a literal one. You can put them on your Schedule C. They don't appreciate or depreciate.
'Employees as assets' is a figure of speech. Do you understand that?
Most firms have a huge amount of slack between what they're paying for and what's getting done. And usually, there's a two to three employee cushion.
Just look at yourself. Are you posting during work hours? Or when you could be working?
And the end of your 'cycle' doesn't hold. When profits drop, shareholders want MORE costs cut. They sure as hell don't want to invest in more new employees. At least not here on Earth. Don't know about your planet.
Get some business books before you start talking about business cycles.
not the least of which I predict will be more goodies for Valenti & Co.
Jack Valenti of Hollywood? You think Hollywood has a friend in Republicans? Oh, that's right, Meathead and Babs and Alec Baldwin are all staunch Republicans.
What planet are you from?
"All things that are, are fire." -- Heracleitus
Do you think this meant he understood atomic energy?
Or was this just the rap he used to score chicks?
Tried it. Didn't work. Repeatedly. (And unplugging and waiting for a good 30-60 seconds.)
On a lark I decided to try the MAC cloning option and it worked.
I've tested it at least twice since then. Same results.
May give it another try again, but I already know what's going to happen.
In fact, when they did their 'clampdown' on MAC addresses I was toast until I realized that the original MAC address I gave them had a wrong digit ('8' instead of a '3' or 'E').
Anyway, when I gave them the corrected number it fired up in a couple of hours.
I think they vary it by location, but what a pain.
If you guys think "a la carte" == cheaper, wake up. This is a new way for cable companies to make more money from you.
Cable companies aren't going to do ANYTHING that they don't think they can get more money for.
I put the parental block on HGTV, Lifetime and TLC after she started watching this crap and had me paint the whole fscking house.
I set the password to '1234'. She'll never figure it out...
Does their DHCP do auth based on the MAC address of the ethernet card or that of the DSL bridge?
If it's like my Cable Provider (ComCast), then it's the card. When I added my Router/Firewall, I had to spoof the MAC address. F**king stupid, if you ask me.
Now I have to keep that number handy FOREVER. However, I just gave the machine with the original card to my brother, who may get ComCast High-Speed and I'm kind of wondering what happens to him.
When I talked to Level 1 tech and told them that I changed the card, they either acted like they didn't know what I was talking about or really were clueless. I suspected the latter and gave up.
I'm sorry. The answer is probably 'card'.
Irregardless
"Nice one, Centurion. Liked it. Liked it."
And the guy that brings them to the server room?
A Blade Runner?
What if you made a sandwich with them?
Reuben Blades?
Sorry. That's all I got.
Hello? Was someone talking to me?
I thought I heard something.
CNN tries to be balanced. They always have tried. They're probably a little left-leaning, but in recent years they've come muth further towards the center, often over-compensating and leaning to the right.
I'm speechless. You, sir, need a brain enema.