Wear is only one aspect of how well a surface works. One of the main issues with concrete is that it does not bend. A small frost heave in the right place can cause the edge of the slab to rise or fall significantly. These sharp drops and/ or rises can make runways unusable. There is a big difference between an interstate where rough roads mean slower speeds and a runway where roughness can cause aircraft crashes.
That makes the assumption that not publicizing the outbreak was for political purposes. It is quite possible that the reason for not publicizing it was that the actual size was small and the harm would have been larger than the good.
As for closing the hospital, perhaps the reason the hospital in Florida was the last in the nation is that all other states realized that dedicated TB hospitals were not a good idea. Medical conditions are always better dealt with in local communities and local hospitals. Sending patients away to dedicated hospitals removes them from their support groups causing depression and worsening many conditions. The hospital in question was not only used for TB. According to the American Hospital Association it was also used for elderly/disabled (Acute long-term care, Skilled nursing care and Intermediate nursing care), end-of-life services (Palliative care) and other outpatient services. The 50 bed hospital had 65 admissions last year. To me that looks like an underutilized hospital ripe for closing. It makes a great sound bite during a campaign but it does not mean it is a bad thing.
Take a look at the CDC TB site before making those statements. According to the site the incidence of TB had steadily dropped from a high of 25,107 in 1993 to a low of 12,904 in 2008. The number of multi-drug resistant cases has also steadily dropped from 484 in 1993 to 103 in 2008. Deaths have also steadily dropped from 1050 to 243 in the same period. The incidence rate in Florida steadily dropped from 1,646 to 954.
So looking at the real statistics 99 is not a large number of cases considering Florida had over 900. The death rate is a little concerning but that could be an anomaly due to the demographics of this outbreak( a higher percentage having compromised immune systems and/or not coming for treatment till it is too late).
We have had people flying around in aircraft for years and no major outbreaks. Yes the homeless, people with AIDS, and people in prison are vulnerable but they don't generally fly if sick. It could spread but has not and probably will not. Things have not changed that much in the last 3 years.
In 2008 there were a total of 12,904 cases of TB in the US reported to the CDC. The number reported in Florida was 954. The 99 in one area seems to be a cluster rather than a concern.
give a 3 year amnesty to move to a private health insurance plan with the health care providers unable to say no
It does not matter how long is given if people can not afford the coverage
force hospitals to itemize their bills and have price lists available for non-emergency care
So hospitals itemize care thet the general public can not afford. How does that help?
have the feds take care of the less than 10% of people who health insurance won't insure at all
What about the other people who can be insured but can not afford it? Sixteen percent of the US population does not have health insurance. Another point is that having health insurance does not mean it is adequate. Some healt insurance has such low caps that a major illness or accident can still be financially devistating.
If you mean this Canada Health Act then no it does not fit on a 8"x11" sheet of paper. Also the Canada Health Act grew out of provincial plans for universal health care. There are no equivalent plans in the US. There are no state health care acts that require every citizen to pay premiums for health care as there were in some provinces in Canada. The Canada Health Act defines what must be done by the provinces and the provinces implement it. It is this way because the British North America Act 1867 stipulates that health care implementation is a provincial area. I know of no similar law in the US.
Right now most health care in the US is provided to people who have private health insurance usually paid for by their employers. That puts many people in the US without adequate health care. Perhaps if there was a better way of providing health care for everyone in the US than obanacare might agree but as of now there is not.
I hate relative terms when there is no indication as to what the term is relative to. For example, if the second worst outbreak in the last 20 years involved 80 people then this one could be the worst and involve 99 people.
What I would rather see is how important is this outbreak. The fact that it is the worst in 20 years does not mean that it is something to be concerned with. The questions to ask are as follows; 1. How much of the population is at risk? 2. Would spreading the information cause more harm than good. Will the populous be more frightened that necessary.
The 13 death tole can be misleading too. Are most of the deaths in people who live on the streets, avoid contact with health facilities and have compromised immune systems. I am not saying to ignore them but health warnings would not help as they would be ignored.
Take a look at the Dallas Fort Worth Airport and you will notice the squares in all the runways and most taxiways. Those are the joins between the concrete slabs. So that airport is almost completely concrete and has very little asphalt. Yes all runways and taxiways could be made of concrete but concrete does not last long in cold climates and costs a lot more.
Actually you have it the wrong way around. Most runways are asphalt with concrete landing areas while taxiways are concrete so aircraft can sit on them or long periods of time. Asphalt is used because it does not have expansion joints and is less susceptible to heaving. Here is an example of a USAF airfield with just that configuration. Note that the taxi ways are a light colour while most of the runway is dark. In the text it explains exactly what kind of asphalt was used. Here is another example in Alaska. Notice that the aircraft are sitting on concrete while most of the rest of the taxiways and runways are asphalt.
There is a reason that the area around the terminal is made of concrete and there are concrete pads placed at spots where airplanes sit. It is to allow them to stay in one place without sinking. While heat will hasten the effect, a fully loaded large airplane will sink into any tarmac. I ride motorcycles and on hot days my kick stand can dig through most tarmac quite easilly(I carry a small metal plate to spread the load on hot days).
The idea is to keep moving so one does not sink. Whoever let the heavy aircraft sit on tarmac instead of concrete is to blame for the issue and not the heat. Even on an average day for July I bet the aircraft would have sunk to some degree in three hours.
The solution to this problem is to not stand for more than a few minutes on tarmac. If the delay is longer, return to the gate or wait on a piece of concrete.
Some differences between the stock market and Amazon book prices; - People have no lost millions of dollars on one sale of a book, - Since there are only a few books at the low price the damage can not reach the billions range,. - People do not base their opinion about the health of a company on the price of a book as they do on the price of a stock. - The price of a book is not reported as an economics indicator like stock prices; people do not get frightened by low book prices. So no, book pricing is very different from stock market pricing. The worst thing that can happen due to low book prices is that people who use this stupid algorithm will make very little money.
Here are a few other things to think about; - Selling below a reasonable price just loses money for sellers. If they do it long enough they will go out of business. - Selling above reasonable prices means the book will not sell and the seller goes out of business. - Amazon will enforce the sale price or they will ban the seller. Yes one can open another account but then there is no seller rating.
Here is a quote from the second article referenced;
That doesn’t necessarily mean those same tools, deployed in the service of pricing goods on Amazon, will cause a widespread implosion in prices; but it could lead to the occasional weirdness, such as a novel selling for much more (or much less) than anyone would reasonably pay for it.
The following is a question asked on a forum I watch;
plzz explain.....what is d dieffrence between both of this statement..... public static List method(List input) public static List method(List input)
wats d difference btwn both of dem(part before method(List input))......if anyone know.....please explain....
The writer had to work to write this poorly and a reader will have to work to decode it. In the end, all it did was agitate forum members and the writer's question was never answered. If you want help then do not make me work needlessly to help you. By the way, this was is not from a hacker site.
To me it is a matter of respect. Does the writer respect himself enough to write his thoughts and questions clearly and concisely and respect the reader enough to simplify his job? The above writer fails on both points.
Large number look great and add punch to articles. The issue is when one can break them down to a realistic level. 1.3 million requests sounds like a big number but so does 327,577,529 which is the number of cellular phones used in the US. That means that 0.4% Of the cellular phones in the US were inquired about through cellular carriers. Considering the number of police investigations in the US I would call that a very small number. It also depends on how the requests come through. Here are some instances where separate requests may need to be done; 1. Complete phone history, 2. Call logs, 3. Voice mail recordings, 4. SMS 5. Location, 6, Time periods, maybe by day, week month, years 7. Browsing history
There may need to be quite a few requests to get all the information an investigation needs.
Even 230 requests in a day is not that much work. Say there was a section that dealt with police requests that had 10 people in it. Say 6 hours productive work. That would be about 15 minutes per request. That should be enough time to deal with a request if the systems are set up properly.
It is true a threat could come from Scientology's legal council but that is not what is being discussed. We are discussing rank and file using the report function on the posting site. They are very different issues. Had the blog mentions the advice to "Read the comment from people and pick the ones that fit the violation of the Code of Conduct" and then stated that Scientologist consider any comment against the church to be "religious discrimination, hate-speech, bigotry and downright criminal" we would have had a chance to agree or disagree with the statement. Without that statement it appears that the Scientologist powers are advising to report every comment that is negative toward Scientology.
The point I was trying to make was the blog did not give the complete story and slanted it to their interpretation. Selective quoting out of context is bad no matter what the subject. It is like someone saying "Anyone who would rape women should be castrated" and having it shortened to "rape women".
And still there is no verification that this email was not made up by Mark Rathbun
I am not a Scientologist and would never join a religion purported to be created on a bet.
The blog takes quotes from the Scientology post out of context. It talkes bout clicking on the report tag and what to write but ignores the this intermediary step;
4. Read the comment from people and pick the ones that fit the violation of the Code of Conduct.
Where the blog post states that the Scientologists are directed to report all anti-Scientology comments they are actually directed to report only the ones that really brear the Code of Conduct.
One final comment; Has the existence of this email been confirmed by an independent source? I would be suspect of anything reported by someone who has a bias against an organization without independent verification. That is one reason I generally don't read blogs; they have a tendency to be unverified and very biased..
I am 49 and I too have been called "Google" many times. I have OCD which manifests itself in the need to know everything. Most people do not have that drive. They work with what they know and only gain the knowledge they need to get the job done. The issue with that is that one does not know what to look for if one does not know it is there. Perhaps they never looked in the BIOS because it never crossed their mind that there could be new parameters in the newer BIOS. If one is not aware that UEFI exists then why look for it?
In this instance the main issue is subtlety. I bet the other techs thought that XP "should" be able to be installed on a machine that install win7 without screwing around with the bios. The presence of one poorly documented bios attribute causing such trouble is very annoying. The fact that the bios is almost the same is frustrating because most of what one knows is valid but one never knows what changed until the change is run into as in this case.
Perhaps your coworkers are grousing about the following; 1. The stupid decision to use an old OS on a computer that was designed for a newer OS. 2. The presences of yet another poorly documented BIOS switch that has major effects on procedures. 3. Now a there are two different procedures for a new piece of hardware; one for an box without UEFI and one for a box with UEFI and little indication of which one is being worked with. How many times have you heard "Crap, I didn't realize this was a 'new' box. I hate these new boxes'. 4. The possibility that more issues will crop up in the future due to the stupid decision. How many times will we have some user or tech who thinks he knows what to do reset the bios and XP will no longer work? What other bios "features" will screw up the XP installation in the future?
You really need to understand what actually happened a little better. 1. Only some of the Jews left Israel. There always have been Jews in Israel so the "my family lived in an area hundreds of years ago, but moved away" should actually be "some my family lived in an area hundreds of years ago, but moved away" 2. Palestine was created when the Ottoman empire was dissolved after WW1. 3. The British partitioned Palestine into the Palestinian territories and Israeli territories. 4. Palestinian were left on their lands by Israeli authorities. 5. When the Arab League attacked the Israeli territories many Palestinian left their homes and went to neighbouring countries. 6. The same thing happened with many Jewish families in Palestinian territories. 7. After the armistice Jews who fled Palestinian lands and Palestinian who fled Israeli lands were not allowed to return. As far as I know there was no bulldozing of occupied Arab towns to make way for Jewish settlers. If you have references I would like to see them. As far as I know most Jews settled in unoccupied areas or areas abandoned by Arabs.
After the fall of Germany Russia was shipping massive numbers troops to Kamchatka and attacked Japanese holdings in China with 1.2 Million troops the same day the Nagasaki bomb was dropped. Do you really think the US was blind to the massive transfer of troops and the mobilization by Russian troops in Easter Asia? It is quite easy to project what a couple of million battle hardened troops from the Germany campaign could do if left to run free in Asia for a few months. One reason to drop the bomb was to avoid having Korea and most of China in Russian hands and having to partition Japan itself.
According to this map from the article you cited I think you man Iraq and not Iran.
If you actually followed some of the links from the article you cited you would fined this. The idea that Zionist want parts of Iraq in a conspiracy theory.
growing fanatical religious movement that have strong power base within the country
Care to cite something that supports this statement. All I can fined is a reference to a political party that merged with a larger one on 1976. By the way, a single professor, Hillel Weiss, does not make a "strong power base".
I know Israel is widely suspected of already having them
There is quit a but of evidence that takes the possibility of Israel having nuclear weapons far beyond "suspected". It is generally accepted that they have them but have not officially admitted to it because they do not want to open the conversation as to what they want them for.
The only connection between Israel and Iran is Iran's desire to "remove Israel from the pages of history". Israel has no desire to Iranian lands.
Care to cite any Kansas suicide bombers? According to this article there has been none. In all bombings the perpetrator threw or set the bomb and left.
The main method of murder of abortion clinic employees has been guns and not bombs.
The presence of nuclear weapons may have stopped major conflicts but it had an interesting effect of allowing minor conflicts to continue. As long as a conflict did not involve the US and Russian interests significantly it was allowed to go on. Take a look at this link, this link and this link and see if you agree that nuclear weapons have stopped all wars.
A colonist is someone who goes some place where they have never been. Jews have been continually in Israel since before the time of King David and most of their holy sites are in Israel. So no, Israelis are not colonist. As for aggressive, of the many wars involving Israel the only one they started was 1976 when Egypt and Jordan were massing for an attack (after expelling UN monitors). If anyone is an aggressor it is the Arabs.
One interesting thing to note is that everyone notes the Palestinians who can not return to their land in Israel because they were on the wrong side of the border when the War of Independence ended (a war started by the Arabs to wipe out Israel). There are also a large number if Jews who can not return to their land in Palestine for the same reasons but they never seem to be mentioned.
Slashdot Mirror
Wear is only one aspect of how well a surface works. One of the main issues with concrete is that it does not bend. A small frost heave in the right place can cause the edge of the slab to rise or fall significantly. These sharp drops and/ or rises can make runways unusable. There is a big difference between an interstate where rough roads mean slower speeds and a runway where roughness can cause aircraft crashes.
Who's fingertip? a four year old girl's fingers or a my sausage sized fingers? Finger tip size varies a lot.
That makes the assumption that not publicizing the outbreak was for political purposes. It is quite possible that the reason for not publicizing it was that the actual size was small and the harm would have been larger than the good.
As for closing the hospital, perhaps the reason the hospital in Florida was the last in the nation is that all other states realized that dedicated TB hospitals were not a good idea. Medical conditions are always better dealt with in local communities and local hospitals. Sending patients away to dedicated hospitals removes them from their support groups causing depression and worsening many conditions.
The hospital in question was not only used for TB. According to the American Hospital Association it was also used for elderly/disabled (Acute long-term care, Skilled nursing care and Intermediate nursing care), end-of-life services (Palliative care) and other outpatient services. The 50 bed hospital had 65 admissions last year. To me that looks like an underutilized hospital ripe for closing. It makes a great sound bite during a campaign but it does not mean it is a bad thing.
Take a look at the CDC TB site before making those statements. According to the site the incidence of TB had steadily dropped from a high of 25,107 in 1993 to a low of 12,904 in 2008. The number of multi-drug resistant cases has also steadily dropped from 484 in 1993 to 103 in 2008. Deaths have also steadily dropped from 1050 to 243 in the same period. The incidence rate in Florida steadily dropped from 1,646 to 954.
So looking at the real statistics 99 is not a large number of cases considering Florida had over 900. The death rate is a little concerning but that could be an anomaly due to the demographics of this outbreak( a higher percentage having compromised immune systems and/or not coming for treatment till it is too late).
We have had people flying around in aircraft for years and no major outbreaks. Yes the homeless, people with AIDS, and people in prison are vulnerable but they don't generally fly if sick. It could spread but has not and probably will not. Things have not changed that much in the last 3 years.
In 2008 there were a total of 12,904 cases of TB in the US reported to the CDC. The number reported in Florida was 954. The 99 in one area seems to be a cluster rather than a concern.
Of course, the easiest way to fix the problem would be to drop the employer health insurance tax credit
and increase the costs to people who have health insurance.
strike down the interstate barriers to health insurance(Oddly enough, a power the commerce clause was actually meant to have),
Take a look at this article
give a 3 year amnesty to move to a private health insurance plan with the health care providers unable to say no
It does not matter how long is given if people can not afford the coverage
force hospitals to itemize their bills and have price lists available for non-emergency care
So hospitals itemize care thet the general public can not afford. How does that help?
have the feds take care of the less than 10% of people who health insurance won't insure at all
What about the other people who can be insured but can not afford it? Sixteen percent of the US population does not have health insurance. Another point is that having health insurance does not mean it is adequate. Some healt insurance has such low caps that a major illness or accident can still be financially devistating.
If you mean this Canada Health Act then no it does not fit on a 8"x11" sheet of paper. Also the Canada Health Act grew out of provincial plans for universal health care. There are no equivalent plans in the US. There are no state health care acts that require every citizen to pay premiums for health care as there were in some provinces in Canada. The Canada Health Act defines what must be done by the provinces and the provinces implement it. It is this way because the British North America Act 1867 stipulates that health care implementation is a provincial area. I know of no similar law in the US.
Right now most health care in the US is provided to people who have private health insurance usually paid for by their employers. That puts many people in the US without adequate health care. Perhaps if there was a better way of providing health care for everyone in the US than obanacare might agree but as of now there is not.
I hate relative terms when there is no indication as to what the term is relative to. For example, if the second worst outbreak in the last 20 years involved 80 people then this one could be the worst and involve 99 people.
What I would rather see is how important is this outbreak. The fact that it is the worst in 20 years does not mean that it is something to be concerned with. The questions to ask are as follows;
1. How much of the population is at risk?
2. Would spreading the information cause more harm than good. Will the populous be more frightened that necessary.
The 13 death tole can be misleading too. Are most of the deaths in people who live on the streets, avoid contact with health facilities and have compromised immune systems. I am not saying to ignore them but health warnings would not help as they would be ignored.
Take a look at the Dallas Fort Worth Airport and you will notice the squares in all the runways and most taxiways. Those are the joins between the concrete slabs. So that airport is almost completely concrete and has very little asphalt. Yes all runways and taxiways could be made of concrete but concrete does not last long in cold climates and costs a lot more.
Actually you have it the wrong way around. Most runways are asphalt with concrete landing areas while taxiways are concrete so aircraft can sit on them or long periods of time. Asphalt is used because it does not have expansion joints and is less susceptible to heaving. Here is an example of a USAF airfield with just that configuration. Note that the taxi ways are a light colour while most of the runway is dark. In the text it explains exactly what kind of asphalt was used. Here is another example in Alaska. Notice that the aircraft are sitting on concrete while most of the rest of the taxiways and runways are asphalt.
Here is an example of a USAF runway that is mostly asphalt. Concrete does not work well where frost heaves can be an issue.
There is a reason that the area around the terminal is made of concrete and there are concrete pads placed at spots where airplanes sit. It is to allow them to stay in one place without sinking. While heat will hasten the effect, a fully loaded large airplane will sink into any tarmac. I ride motorcycles and on hot days my kick stand can dig through most tarmac quite easilly(I carry a small metal plate to spread the load on hot days).
The idea is to keep moving so one does not sink. Whoever let the heavy aircraft sit on tarmac instead of concrete is to blame for the issue and not the heat. Even on an average day for July I bet the aircraft would have sunk to some degree in three hours.
The solution to this problem is to not stand for more than a few minutes on tarmac. If the delay is longer, return to the gate or wait on a piece of concrete.
Some differences between the stock market and Amazon book prices;
- People have no lost millions of dollars on one sale of a book,
- Since there are only a few books at the low price the damage can not reach the billions range,.
- People do not base their opinion about the health of a company on the price of a book as they do on the price of a stock.
- The price of a book is not reported as an economics indicator like stock prices; people do not get frightened by low book prices.
So no, book pricing is very different from stock market pricing. The worst thing that can happen due to low book prices is that people who use this stupid algorithm will make very little money.
Here are a few other things to think about;
- Selling below a reasonable price just loses money for sellers. If they do it long enough they will go out of business.
- Selling above reasonable prices means the book will not sell and the seller goes out of business.
- Amazon will enforce the sale price or they will ban the seller. Yes one can open another account but then there is no seller rating.
Here is a quote from the second article referenced;
That doesn’t necessarily mean those same tools, deployed in the service of pricing goods on Amazon, will cause a widespread implosion in prices; but it could lead to the occasional weirdness, such as a novel selling for much more (or much less) than anyone would reasonably pay for it.
The following is a question asked on a forum I watch;
plzz explain.....what is d dieffrence between both of this statement.....
public static List method(List input)
public static List method(List input)
wats d difference btwn both of dem(part before method(List input))......if anyone know.....please explain....
The writer had to work to write this poorly and a reader will have to work to decode it. In the end, all it did was agitate forum members and the writer's question was never answered. If you want help then do not make me work needlessly to help you. By the way, this was is not from a hacker site.
To me it is a matter of respect. Does the writer respect himself enough to write his thoughts and questions clearly and concisely and respect the reader enough to simplify his job? The above writer fails on both points.
Large number look great and add punch to articles. The issue is when one can break them down to a realistic level.
1.3 million requests sounds like a big number but so does 327,577,529 which is the number of cellular phones used in the US. That means that 0.4% Of the cellular phones in the US were inquired about through cellular carriers. Considering the number of police investigations in the US I would call that a very small number.
It also depends on how the requests come through. Here are some instances where separate requests may need to be done;
1. Complete phone history,
2. Call logs,
3. Voice mail recordings,
4. SMS
5. Location,
6, Time periods, maybe by day, week month, years
7. Browsing history
There may need to be quite a few requests to get all the information an investigation needs.
Even 230 requests in a day is not that much work. Say there was a section that dealt with police requests that had 10 people in it. Say 6 hours productive work. That would be about 15 minutes per request. That should be enough time to deal with a request if the systems are set up properly.
It is true a threat could come from Scientology's legal council but that is not what is being discussed. We are discussing rank and file using the report function on the posting site. They are very different issues. Had the blog mentions the advice to "Read the comment from people and pick the ones that fit the violation of the Code of Conduct" and then stated that Scientologist consider any comment against the church to be "religious discrimination, hate-speech, bigotry and downright criminal" we would have had a chance to agree or disagree with the statement. Without that statement it appears that the Scientologist powers are advising to report every comment that is negative toward Scientology.
The point I was trying to make was the blog did not give the complete story and slanted it to their interpretation. Selective quoting out of context is bad no matter what the subject. It is like someone saying "Anyone who would rape women should be castrated" and having it shortened to "rape women".
And still there is no verification that this email was not made up by Mark Rathbun
I am not a Scientologist and would never join a religion purported to be created on a bet.
The blog takes quotes from the Scientology post out of context. It talkes bout clicking on the report tag and what to write but ignores the this intermediary step;
4. Read the comment from people and pick the ones that fit the violation of the Code of Conduct.
Where the blog post states that the Scientologists are directed to report all anti-Scientology comments they are actually directed to report only the ones that really brear the Code of Conduct.
One final comment; Has the existence of this email been confirmed by an independent source? I would be suspect of anything reported by someone who has a bias against an organization without independent verification. That is one reason I generally don't read blogs; they have a tendency to be unverified and very biased..
I am 49 and I too have been called "Google" many times. I have OCD which manifests itself in the need to know everything. Most people do not have that drive. They work with what they know and only gain the knowledge they need to get the job done. The issue with that is that one does not know what to look for if one does not know it is there. Perhaps they never looked in the BIOS because it never crossed their mind that there could be new parameters in the newer BIOS. If one is not aware that UEFI exists then why look for it?
In this instance the main issue is subtlety. I bet the other techs thought that XP "should" be able to be installed on a machine that install win7 without screwing around with the bios. The presence of one poorly documented bios attribute causing such trouble is very annoying. The fact that the bios is almost the same is frustrating because most of what one knows is valid but one never knows what changed until the change is run into as in this case.
Perhaps your coworkers are grousing about the following;
1. The stupid decision to use an old OS on a computer that was designed for a newer OS.
2. The presences of yet another poorly documented BIOS switch that has major effects on procedures.
3. Now a there are two different procedures for a new piece of hardware; one for an box without UEFI and one for a box with UEFI and little indication of which one is being worked with. How many times have you heard "Crap, I didn't realize this was a 'new' box. I hate these new boxes'.
4. The possibility that more issues will crop up in the future due to the stupid decision. How many times will we have some user or tech who thinks he knows what to do reset the bios and XP will no longer work? What other bios "features" will screw up the XP installation in the future?
You really need to understand what actually happened a little better.
1. Only some of the Jews left Israel. There always have been Jews in Israel so the "my family lived in an area hundreds of years ago, but moved away" should actually be "some my family lived in an area hundreds of years ago, but moved away"
2. Palestine was created when the Ottoman empire was dissolved after WW1.
3. The British partitioned Palestine into the Palestinian territories and Israeli territories.
4. Palestinian were left on their lands by Israeli authorities.
5. When the Arab League attacked the Israeli territories many Palestinian left their homes and went to neighbouring countries.
6. The same thing happened with many Jewish families in Palestinian territories.
7. After the armistice Jews who fled Palestinian lands and Palestinian who fled Israeli lands were not allowed to return.
As far as I know there was no bulldozing of occupied Arab towns to make way for Jewish settlers. If you have references I would like to see them. As far as I know most Jews settled in unoccupied areas or areas abandoned by Arabs.
After the fall of Germany Russia was shipping massive numbers troops to Kamchatka and attacked Japanese holdings in China with 1.2 Million troops the same day the Nagasaki bomb was dropped. Do you really think the US was blind to the massive transfer of troops and the mobilization by Russian troops in Easter Asia? It is quite easy to project what a couple of million battle hardened troops from the Germany campaign could do if left to run free in Asia for a few months. One reason to drop the bomb was to avoid having Korea and most of China in Russian hands and having to partition Japan itself.
possible to enforce a ban
We can't eve enforce a ban in a small country like North Korea how would we do that to a much larger country? I believe it would take a war to do it.
According to this map from the article you cited I think you man Iraq and not Iran.
If you actually followed some of the links from the article you cited you would fined this. The idea that Zionist want parts of Iraq in a conspiracy theory.
growing fanatical religious movement that have strong power base within the country
Care to cite something that supports this statement. All I can fined is a reference to a political party that merged with a larger one on 1976. By the way, a single professor, Hillel Weiss, does not make a "strong power base".
I know Israel is widely suspected of already having them
There is quit a but of evidence that takes the possibility of Israel having nuclear weapons far beyond "suspected". It is generally accepted that they have them but have not officially admitted to it because they do not want to open the conversation as to what they want them for.
The only connection between Israel and Iran is Iran's desire to "remove Israel from the pages of history". Israel has no desire to Iranian lands.
Care to cite any Kansas suicide bombers? According to this article there has been none. In all bombings the perpetrator threw or set the bomb and left.
The main method of murder of abortion clinic employees has been guns and not bombs.
The presence of nuclear weapons may have stopped major conflicts but it had an interesting effect of allowing minor conflicts to continue. As long as a conflict did not involve the US and Russian interests significantly it was allowed to go on. Take a look at this link, this link and this link and see if you agree that nuclear weapons have stopped all wars.
even if they are aggressive colonizers.
A colonist is someone who goes some place where they have never been. Jews have been continually in Israel since before the time of King David and most of their holy sites are in Israel. So no, Israelis are not colonist. As for aggressive, of the many wars involving Israel the only one they started was 1976 when Egypt and Jordan were massing for an attack (after expelling UN monitors). If anyone is an aggressor it is the Arabs.
One interesting thing to note is that everyone notes the Palestinians who can not return to their land in Israel because they were on the wrong side of the border when the War of Independence ended (a war started by the Arabs to wipe out Israel). There are also a large number if Jews who can not return to their land in Palestine for the same reasons but they never seem to be mentioned.