Generally the military purchases the vaccine directly. However, we've had enough trouble with single-source providers that maybe we're working on having the ability to produce the stuff more directly.
I feel that the whole article was fear mongering. The critical line, in my opinion, was "and is used for vaccination".
Though the usage in docontamination tests is certainly an option. Dirty secret: You have to have things close to biological/chemical weapons, knowledge of them, in order to design defenses against them.
Have you also forgotten about VAT? The cost of doing business in Europe is also quite a bit higher than in the States. Those expenses have to be taken account of.
What part of "Nuclear power is statistically one of the safest major power sources available to humans" are you too stupid to understand?
When we've been 'lucky' for the last forty years, with dozens of plants, hundreds worldwide, when does 'luck' start becoming 'statistics', allowing us to state that it's safe?
I mean, every coal plant/mine is a horrible fire waiting to happen under your logic. All those wind turbines are just looking to come crashing down on homes and vehicles. Dams can break, placing everybody downstream at risk.
It'd take every nuclear plant causing a new orleans level disaster to even start rivaling one of the deadliest parts of our society: The Car.
I'd also say that it has to orbit a sun. Dual/twin planets would be defined by center-point of orbit. If the center of orbit is within one of the objects, then the other is a moon. If not, then it's a binary(etc) formation.
You have the whole problem that people want to keep pluto as a planet, while not promoting the 'riff-raff' in the asteroid belts.
I also wouldn't put down the company allowing the media portion of the company to dictate terms to the hardware portion. Resulting in products that are incompatible, harder to use, and more expensive than the competitors.
12k gets you permission to use the subway name and products.
You still have obtain a building, decorate it, get it foodservice qualified for the local area and subway's standards, hire staff, obtain insurance, utilities, etc.
1. It's still not real 'news'. Like I said, this protocol has been updated, to my rememberance, for at least the last 8 years. Now that I think about it, they were fairly quiet about it during the Clinton years, but I remember hearing about the redrafts during bush seniors time, and let's not even get into the cold war.
2. Who says that Bush was thinking about them? Some analysist in the buerocracy did. Like I said, the restatement is an annual event.
3. I am taking an interest. I really feel that we're cleaning up the detrius of the cold war right now. Far too many deals with devils were signed. However, we still have a lot of envy and hatred stemming from, essentially, our very success. Class politics on a global scale. They hate us when we send them aid. They hate us when we intervene. They also hate us when we don't intervene or send aid. They hate us because our businesses succeed in their countries. And complete ignorance? I'd be willing to bet that I know more than you. I've been in at least 10 foreign countries in the last 6 years.
And as far as Bush goes, and his 'imperialism', I'd like to point out that a large portion of the republican party thinks that he's too liberal. I think so, and I'm a libertarian. I'm pissed about him not balancing spending, the patriot act, not securing the borders, etc.
And I'll state again: Couldn't you democrats have found a better candidate?
It's about using gas for peak energy needs. From what I've seen, gas is one of the more expensive fossil fuels, and they're projecting us on running out of it faster than oil.
Thus, I think that hydroelectric will be a good option now. If we stop using it for baseline power, it's as simple as opening a gate to turn up the power.
I wouldn't use a police officer as an example, because we're at war, not enforcing law. There's a difference.
As for corruption and abuse, well, that's what investigations and inspections are for.
if we, as police, kill a street thug, but kill his little sister at the same time, his two brothers will join the gang to fight against us.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe, just in killing the thug, the brothers will join. Maybe, probably, they've already joined.
Kill them and their small children, and eight others join the fight...
Generally, once you've killed the entire family, those who'd attack in revenge have been killed off. I want it to be 'hanging around terrorists is hazardous', 'supporting terrorists is extremely hazardous', 'letting terrorists hide among you is hazardous'.
Am I bloodthirsty? In some ways, yes. At the same time I'd offer money and protection for information. Heck, I'm normally opposed to public work projects, but in Iraq and such, I think that they'd be a good idea. Get people skills, keep them busy, create a demand for more services/goods.
Hmm... There's many ways to take that comment, not all of them racist.
For example, I don't care what color you are, but I have a definite bias against the 'poor'. My grandparents lived better on less equivalent money. How? They budgeted. Ever heard of 'poor white trash'? I have some family that are just that.
As far as public housing goes, well, that's so often such a huge mess I do tend to think that the best solution would be to demolish it all and start over.
On the subject of Jim Crow laws, well, I look at the films of what happened back then and shudder. How could supposably sane people be so illogical?
Looking through the internet, it seems that he's proposed regulations making companies rehabilitate housing more.
But if he's like me, his view would be that there's a limit to what he can legally do at that level.
1. That's war for you 2. Not innocents. People who support the terrorists through their inaction and silence at most. You report them, I'm going to do my damnest to protect you. 3. If the extremists end up in power then you nuke them, invade, or something 4. Carrot & stick. They work best together. Use a little more stick. That's all I'm asking for.
And to think that you could have beat him if you hadn't managed to find just about the worst possible candidate to run against him possible.
You're doing something wrong when most of the people who voted for your candidate were 'voting against the other guy'.
You want scary. Imagine me as president. Congress would of had to override my veto in order to pass an unbalanced budget. I would be pushing for a vastly simplified tax system.
As for the mideast, well, I'd have to spend quite some time looking at all the classified documents to decide what to change there.
1. I've seen these statements for the last 8 years. The wording changes, but the core does not. The President has had the power for years to practically say 'Nuke xxx' and we would nuke xxx. This doctrine simply changes it so some four star requests permission from the president to Nuke xxx. Like this doesn't/wouldn't happen already if the situation warrents it. 2. I don't trust Bush. Trust him more than Kerry, but not by much. 3. I don't know. I mean, aside from September 11, the world hasn't changed for the USA that much. We're pretty much whining about the same things that we were before. Well, except for Iraq, but my response to that is "about time". It's a good thing to get taken care of.
New Orleans, the #2 largest port in the nation, is one of the biggest "interstate" (and international) commerce hubs in the country, in the world. Should Louisiana or the city charge tariffs on every ship that passes through, to pay for the levees that protect their traffic?
Sounds like a good idea. If the levees end up costing so much that ships avoid that port for elsewhere, well, that's economics for you.
And when the LA governor decides a local porkbarrel project needs their attention more than finishing that aqueduct they've been loaned/hired to do to fight the wildfires in Colorado, who will overrule them?
Uh, why would LA engineers even be building an aquaduct for colorado? Colorado should have their own engineers. Heck, hire companies to handle that.
Really, it's pretty clear that the main problem is in the White House and DHS/FEMA offices.
Actually, it's pretty clear that the main problem is in the New Orlean's Governor's House and the Louisiana Senate for not taking precautions against a known, predicted threat.
I've lived in a number of states. I'm currently in ND because of my job, but that's temporary. But sure. I'd prefer that you do it gradually, so prices can adjust accordingly. Just don't be suprised when food prices increase a bit. Say a eight year period. 12.5% a year.
At the same time, you renounce all federal aid money you receive. The accounting is so complex it's better for everybody to go to zero, don't you agree? NYC can pay for all it's security measures. Determine it's own best path.
I don't care about red/blue. Personally, I'm green. Each state should take care of the majority of it's own affairs.
Boy, I'm tired to make such a stupid mistake. On my parent post, Korea=Vietnam.
Like I said, if we'd been allowed to bomb and take out North Vietnam's weapon production centers, we would have won. Without all the stupid ROE's handtying the military, we would have won.
People, especially back then, especially in Asian countries, were cheap. Families were large, population dense. Soldiers were relativly easy. Machinery, however, was tougher. If they couldn't produce guns or ammo they wouldn't have been able to keep fighting for long enough.
You have to treat domestic problems differently from foreign problems. For one thing, we have freedom of speech(and I wouldn't have it any other way).
In criminal matters, you have 'good guys' and 'bad guys'. Yes, matters often degenerate to shades of grey, but war, in many ways, is the ultimate grey.
Your enemy could be a fine upstanding individual fighting for his country. As are you. But he's still the enemy, and it's your job to kill him, preferbly before he kills you, your buddies, and everybody else. Collateral damage happens.
But we're the equivalent of a professional boxer, playing by the rules of boxing while we're fighting a street fighter. We're handicapping ourselves.
In many ways, much of the support for the terrorists comes from fear of them. It's simple: The terrorists threaten to kill anybody who aids the americans, talks to the americans, works with the americans, etc... Oh, and we'll harm/kill you if you don't support us.
I hate to say it, but we need to install an equal fear of harboring the terrorists. I mean, as it is, prisoners often eat better than they did while they were on the loose. There's not alot to gain from aiding us, at least in the short term.
And why are the levees federal to begin with? I'd say that they belong to New Orleans, maybe Luisiana. Stuff is best handled at the lowest level.
Bush has to worry about 49 other states, hundreds to thousands of other cities. It's not really his problem.
Or do you mean to tell me that if New Orleans said 'we can't get money to upgrade this levy from you, so we're going to do it ourselves' that the Feds would say no?
Florida isn't built below sea level, still takes plenty of damage, and has building codes through the roof anymore. All new construction is to be able to handle strong hurricanes.
I know I'm not the origional poster, but since I'm aparently of the same attitude, I'll answer.
The philosophy is that YOU are the first and last line of support for yourself. Everybody and everthing else is undependable. While, indeed, it can be a lifesaver, it can also be a detriment. I mean, look at the old woman 'evacuated' from the house where she had stored food, water, and a self defense firearm. Police bodyslammed her in their eagerness to rescue her. Thus, it's best not to depend on it. Be thankful if you get it, but try to avoid being in a situation where you do need it.
Depend on it for: Well, quite a bit actually. I appreciate having cops out there looking for thieves and murderers(and other assorted criminals). Since they're nice enough to pay for fire protection, I'll take that as well(not like I have a choice). Military, roads.
Vote: Because I'm a citizen of the USA, and it at least gives me a chance to alter/shape the government to my views. I also write letters, etc. Pay Taxes: Because I do consume some government services(police protection, military, fire, roads). 300M live this way? Easily. Think about it, how much more money would you have if you weren't charged taxes? If all the people in the IRS and other various federal agencies had to find jobs at something productive? If all the people on welfare had to get jobs? Our average standard of living would go up!
Do I feel threatened by Al Qaeda? Oh, a little. After all he has declared war on us. I think the chance is remote, but it doesn't actually require much modification to my plans. Between natural disasters and common criminals, I have them covered.
Have I gone out to get Osama? Nope, that's what the military is for. Just as I don't feel the need to go white-hatting after criminals, though I'll attempt to stop one if I see a crime in progress.
Introduce mandatory voting; 40% voter turnout isnt a democracy.
It is when they have the opportunity to vote. As far as I'm concerned, "I don't know", or "I don't care" are valid choices.
I agree with most of the rest. Especially the gerrymandering.
Personally, the biggest problem I see is corruption.
Eliminate and disempower local governement - there is no need for every butt-fuck town and parish in the US to run its own police force, school system, sewerage plant, tax collection, etc etc.
wrong, Wrong, WRONG. The Federal government, on average, is the least efficient at these solutions. Most of the problem is Federal government sticking their noses into it.
I mean, look at Washington DC. That's the example of what Federally controlled services end up like. They have the most expensive failed schools, they're near the top of the 'worst cities' lists for crime every year, etc...
The way I'd do it would be to return the selection of Senators to the state congresses, and have the states pay the federal taxes directly. How they collect it is up to the state.
a: I don't believe in Good and Evil in the traditional sense b: WWJD is NOT my philosophy c: Then you simply kill all the muslims d: My one line answer was (mostly)sarcastic e: The extra countries were listed simply to get by slashdot's lameness filter f: I'm not talking about targeting all the muslims. But the ones that run around burning our flag and rioting in support of terrorist attacks would be a good start.
What I do believe is that you have to do is make the war(and it is a war) too horrible for the terrorists to continue, to make people not support the terrorists, to make countries sit up and control their own extremists. I think that we're far too tilted to the way of the carrot, rather than the stick.
In many ways, LOAC is like fighting by the Code Duello. Sure, it works, and helps calm things down after the duel, but if one side refuses to abide by the rules, it give them an advantage.
The same is true in war. If we had gone, consistantly and constantly, after North Korea's means of producing war goods we could of won that war.
As the other poster noted, I wrote the original entry from memory, so some of my figures are a bit off. It's interesting to see however, just how close I am.
As for the waste of the recycled waste, what you're really doing is just re-seperating the fuel. What you end up with is functionally identical to new fuel.
ANL-W History - Reactors Points: New fuel achieves 10-20% fission rate before replacement. Current rate: 3-6%. Reprocessing spent fuel with these reactors: Reduce waste stream by a factor of 2 to 10. 80% reuse would result in a factor of 5, which is midstream.
1. Your proposal is invalid. US policy has always retained the option of first strike 2. It's not a law. It's a policy. Congress hasn't voted on the matter. Therefore it can change whenever the president feels like it. 3. Every couple of years they revise this policy just to remind everybody.
Slashdot Mirror
Generally the military purchases the vaccine directly. However, we've had enough trouble with single-source providers that maybe we're working on having the ability to produce the stuff more directly.
I feel that the whole article was fear mongering. The critical line, in my opinion, was "and is used for vaccination".
Though the usage in docontamination tests is certainly an option. Dirty secret: You have to have things close to biological/chemical weapons, knowledge of them, in order to design defenses against them.
Have you also forgotten about VAT? The cost of doing business in Europe is also quite a bit higher than in the States. Those expenses have to be taken account of.
What part of "Nuclear power is statistically one of the safest major power sources available to humans" are you too stupid to understand?
When we've been 'lucky' for the last forty years, with dozens of plants, hundreds worldwide, when does 'luck' start becoming 'statistics', allowing us to state that it's safe?
I mean, every coal plant/mine is a horrible fire waiting to happen under your logic. All those wind turbines are just looking to come crashing down on homes and vehicles. Dams can break, placing everybody downstream at risk.
It'd take every nuclear plant causing a new orleans level disaster to even start rivaling one of the deadliest parts of our society: The Car.
I'd also say that it has to orbit a sun. Dual/twin planets would be defined by center-point of orbit. If the center of orbit is within one of the objects, then the other is a moon. If not, then it's a binary(etc) formation.
You have the whole problem that people want to keep pluto as a planet, while not promoting the 'riff-raff' in the asteroid belts.
I also wouldn't put down the company allowing the media portion of the company to dictate terms to the hardware portion. Resulting in products that are incompatible, harder to use, and more expensive than the competitors.
Not to mention start-up costs.
12k gets you permission to use the subway name and products.
You still have obtain a building, decorate it, get it foodservice qualified for the local area and subway's standards, hire staff, obtain insurance, utilities, etc.
It gets expensive fast.
1. It's still not real 'news'. Like I said, this protocol has been updated, to my rememberance, for at least the last 8 years. Now that I think about it, they were fairly quiet about it during the Clinton years, but I remember hearing about the redrafts during bush seniors time, and let's not even get into the cold war.
2. Who says that Bush was thinking about them? Some analysist in the buerocracy did. Like I said, the restatement is an annual event.
3. I am taking an interest. I really feel that we're cleaning up the detrius of the cold war right now. Far too many deals with devils were signed. However, we still have a lot of envy and hatred stemming from, essentially, our very success. Class politics on a global scale. They hate us when we send them aid. They hate us when we intervene. They also hate us when we don't intervene or send aid. They hate us because our businesses succeed in their countries. And complete ignorance? I'd be willing to bet that I know more than you. I've been in at least 10 foreign countries in the last 6 years.
And as far as Bush goes, and his 'imperialism', I'd like to point out that a large portion of the republican party thinks that he's too liberal. I think so, and I'm a libertarian. I'm pissed about him not balancing spending, the patriot act, not securing the borders, etc.
And I'll state again: Couldn't you democrats have found a better candidate?
Sorry for the delay, was in transit for ~3 days.
I have one exception/addition for your statement.
It's about using gas for peak energy needs. From what I've seen, gas is one of the more expensive fossil fuels, and they're projecting us on running out of it faster than oil.
Thus, I think that hydroelectric will be a good option now. If we stop using it for baseline power, it's as simple as opening a gate to turn up the power.
I wouldn't use a police officer as an example, because we're at war, not enforcing law. There's a difference.
As for corruption and abuse, well, that's what investigations and inspections are for.
if we, as police, kill a street thug, but kill his little sister at the same time, his two brothers will join the gang to fight against us.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe, just in killing the thug, the brothers will join. Maybe, probably, they've already joined.
Kill them and their small children, and eight others join the fight...
Generally, once you've killed the entire family, those who'd attack in revenge have been killed off. I want it to be 'hanging around terrorists is hazardous', 'supporting terrorists is extremely hazardous', 'letting terrorists hide among you is hazardous'.
Am I bloodthirsty? In some ways, yes. At the same time I'd offer money and protection for information. Heck, I'm normally opposed to public work projects, but in Iraq and such, I think that they'd be a good idea. Get people skills, keep them busy, create a demand for more services/goods.
Hmm... There's many ways to take that comment, not all of them racist.
For example, I don't care what color you are, but I have a definite bias against the 'poor'. My grandparents lived better on less equivalent money. How? They budgeted. Ever heard of 'poor white trash'? I have some family that are just that.
As far as public housing goes, well, that's so often such a huge mess I do tend to think that the best solution would be to demolish it all and start over.
On the subject of Jim Crow laws, well, I look at the films of what happened back then and shudder. How could supposably sane people be so illogical?
Looking through the internet, it seems that he's proposed regulations making companies rehabilitate housing more.
But if he's like me, his view would be that there's a limit to what he can legally do at that level.
1. That's war for you
2. Not innocents. People who support the terrorists through their inaction and silence at most. You report them, I'm going to do my damnest to protect you.
3. If the extremists end up in power then you nuke them, invade, or something
4. Carrot & stick. They work best together. Use a little more stick. That's all I'm asking for.
And to think that you could have beat him if you hadn't managed to find just about the worst possible candidate to run against him possible.
You're doing something wrong when most of the people who voted for your candidate were 'voting against the other guy'.
You want scary. Imagine me as president. Congress would of had to override my veto in order to pass an unbalanced budget. I would be pushing for a vastly simplified tax system.
As for the mideast, well, I'd have to spend quite some time looking at all the classified documents to decide what to change there.
1. I've seen these statements for the last 8 years. The wording changes, but the core does not. The President has had the power for years to practically say 'Nuke xxx' and we would nuke xxx. This doctrine simply changes it so some four star requests permission from the president to Nuke xxx. Like this doesn't/wouldn't happen already if the situation warrents it.
2. I don't trust Bush. Trust him more than Kerry, but not by much.
3. I don't know. I mean, aside from September 11, the world hasn't changed for the USA that much. We're pretty much whining about the same things that we were before. Well, except for Iraq, but my response to that is "about time". It's a good thing to get taken care of.
New Orleans, the #2 largest port in the nation, is one of the biggest "interstate" (and international) commerce hubs in the country, in the world. Should Louisiana or the city charge tariffs on every ship that passes through, to pay for the levees that protect their traffic?
Sounds like a good idea. If the levees end up costing so much that ships avoid that port for elsewhere, well, that's economics for you.
And when the LA governor decides a local porkbarrel project needs their attention more than finishing that aqueduct they've been loaned/hired to do to fight the wildfires in Colorado, who will overrule them?
Uh, why would LA engineers even be building an aquaduct for colorado? Colorado should have their own engineers. Heck, hire companies to handle that.
Really, it's pretty clear that the main problem is in the White House and DHS/FEMA offices.
Actually, it's pretty clear that the main problem is in the New Orlean's Governor's House and the Louisiana Senate for not taking precautions against a known, predicted threat.
I've lived in a number of states. I'm currently in ND because of my job, but that's temporary. But sure. I'd prefer that you do it gradually, so prices can adjust accordingly. Just don't be suprised when food prices increase a bit. Say a eight year period. 12.5% a year.
At the same time, you renounce all federal aid money you receive. The accounting is so complex it's better for everybody to go to zero, don't you agree? NYC can pay for all it's security measures. Determine it's own best path.
I don't care about red/blue. Personally, I'm green. Each state should take care of the majority of it's own affairs.
Ah, you see my point. We can deal with big groups of hostiles far better than ones and twos hiding among 'neutrals'.
Boy, I'm tired to make such a stupid mistake. On my parent post, Korea=Vietnam.
Like I said, if we'd been allowed to bomb and take out North Vietnam's weapon production centers, we would have won. Without all the stupid ROE's handtying the military, we would have won.
People, especially back then, especially in Asian countries, were cheap. Families were large, population dense. Soldiers were relativly easy. Machinery, however, was tougher. If they couldn't produce guns or ammo they wouldn't have been able to keep fighting for long enough.
Heh, I graduated from Northeast HS in Lincoln.
You have to treat domestic problems differently from foreign problems. For one thing, we have freedom of speech(and I wouldn't have it any other way).
In criminal matters, you have 'good guys' and 'bad guys'. Yes, matters often degenerate to shades of grey, but war, in many ways, is the ultimate grey.
Your enemy could be a fine upstanding individual fighting for his country. As are you. But he's still the enemy, and it's your job to kill him, preferbly before he kills you, your buddies, and everybody else. Collateral damage happens.
But we're the equivalent of a professional boxer, playing by the rules of boxing while we're fighting a street fighter. We're handicapping ourselves.
In many ways, much of the support for the terrorists comes from fear of them. It's simple: The terrorists threaten to kill anybody who aids the americans, talks to the americans, works with the americans, etc... Oh, and we'll harm/kill you if you don't support us.
I hate to say it, but we need to install an equal fear of harboring the terrorists. I mean, as it is, prisoners often eat better than they did while they were on the loose. There's not alot to gain from aiding us, at least in the short term.
And why are the levees federal to begin with? I'd say that they belong to New Orleans, maybe Luisiana. Stuff is best handled at the lowest level.
Bush has to worry about 49 other states, hundreds to thousands of other cities. It's not really his problem.
Or do you mean to tell me that if New Orleans said 'we can't get money to upgrade this levy from you, so we're going to do it ourselves' that the Feds would say no?
Florida isn't built below sea level, still takes plenty of damage, and has building codes through the roof anymore. All new construction is to be able to handle strong hurricanes.
I know I'm not the origional poster, but since I'm aparently of the same attitude, I'll answer.
The philosophy is that YOU are the first and last line of support for yourself. Everybody and everthing else is undependable. While, indeed, it can be a lifesaver, it can also be a detriment. I mean, look at the old woman 'evacuated' from the house where she had stored food, water, and a self defense firearm. Police bodyslammed her in their eagerness to rescue her. Thus, it's best not to depend on it. Be thankful if you get it, but try to avoid being in a situation where you do need it.
Depend on it for: Well, quite a bit actually. I appreciate having cops out there looking for thieves and murderers(and other assorted criminals). Since they're nice enough to pay for fire protection, I'll take that as well(not like I have a choice). Military, roads.
Vote: Because I'm a citizen of the USA, and it at least gives me a chance to alter/shape the government to my views. I also write letters, etc.
Pay Taxes: Because I do consume some government services(police protection, military, fire, roads).
300M live this way? Easily. Think about it, how much more money would you have if you weren't charged taxes? If all the people in the IRS and other various federal agencies had to find jobs at something productive? If all the people on welfare had to get jobs? Our average standard of living would go up!
Do I feel threatened by Al Qaeda? Oh, a little. After all he has declared war on us. I think the chance is remote, but it doesn't actually require much modification to my plans. Between natural disasters and common criminals, I have them covered.
Have I gone out to get Osama? Nope, that's what the military is for. Just as I don't feel the need to go white-hatting after criminals, though I'll attempt to stop one if I see a crime in progress.
Introduce mandatory voting; 40% voter turnout isnt a democracy.
It is when they have the opportunity to vote. As far as I'm concerned, "I don't know", or "I don't care" are valid choices.
I agree with most of the rest. Especially the gerrymandering.
Personally, the biggest problem I see is corruption.
Eliminate and disempower local governement - there is no need for every butt-fuck town and parish in the US to run its own police force, school system, sewerage plant, tax collection, etc etc.
wrong, Wrong, WRONG. The Federal government, on average, is the least efficient at these solutions. Most of the problem is Federal government sticking their noses into it.
I mean, look at Washington DC. That's the example of what Federally controlled services end up like. They have the most expensive failed schools, they're near the top of the 'worst cities' lists for crime every year, etc...
The way I'd do it would be to return the selection of Senators to the state congresses, and have the states pay the federal taxes directly. How they collect it is up to the state.
a: I don't believe in Good and Evil in the traditional sense
b: WWJD is NOT my philosophy
c: Then you simply kill all the muslims
d: My one line answer was (mostly)sarcastic
e: The extra countries were listed simply to get by slashdot's lameness filter
f: I'm not talking about targeting all the muslims. But the ones that run around burning our flag and rioting in support of terrorist attacks would be a good start.
What I do believe is that you have to do is make the war(and it is a war) too horrible for the terrorists to continue, to make people not support the terrorists, to make countries sit up and control their own extremists. I think that we're far too tilted to the way of the carrot, rather than the stick.
In many ways, LOAC is like fighting by the Code Duello. Sure, it works, and helps calm things down after the duel, but if one side refuses to abide by the rules, it give them an advantage.
The same is true in war. If we had gone, consistantly and constantly, after North Korea's means of producing war goods we could of won that war.
As the other poster noted, I wrote the original entry from memory, so some of my figures are a bit off. It's interesting to see however, just how close I am.
As for the waste of the recycled waste, what you're really doing is just re-seperating the fuel. What you end up with is functionally identical to new fuel.
ANL-W History - Reactors
Points: New fuel achieves 10-20% fission rate before replacement. Current rate: 3-6%. Reprocessing spent fuel with these reactors: Reduce waste stream by a factor of 2 to 10. 80% reuse would result in a factor of 5, which is midstream.
1. Your proposal is invalid. US policy has always retained the option of first strike
2. It's not a law. It's a policy. Congress hasn't voted on the matter. Therefore it can change whenever the president feels like it.
3. Every couple of years they revise this policy just to remind everybody.
Yes.
Not to mention Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc...