"Israel and Hizbolla are both doing just that right now."
Ah, lets make no distinction between TRYING to hit civilian targets and trying to limit civilian targets by leafleting and bullhorning warnings.
Hezballah is hiding in civilian populations, hiding munitions in houses, mosques, schools and hospitals because it is IMPOSSIBLE to bomb them without civilian casualties. They USE civilians as sheild and the willing appologists love to trot out the corpses of little children and women, "innocent" deaths as if Israel is actively targeting them.
Meanwhile not a condemnation of bombers walking into a market and blowing themselves up, almost on a daily basis. Rockets fired indiscriminately into civilian populations. Marching little boys down the street with fully armed with rifles in hand.
You see, by equating civilian deaths, you have lined up with Hezballah.
"Yep. Equitable peace at any cost. Do you mean you prefer this forever war?"
How do you define "equitable". Israel has given 98% of what Palistine has asked. Gaza was forsaken, Golan was vacated. Only to have the terrorists move in, and start lobbing bombs into civilian cities. World outcry over a fence to keep them on the other side. Personally, I think Israel has bent over backwards trying to live in peace with its neighbors. Meanwhile, the surrounding countries have people sworn to the destruction of all Jews. So, please define "equitable" in terms that don't allow more bombs to be lobbed into a soverign state from its neighbors.
The only solution acceptable to some is Genocide. And until people realize that, and change it, there will be no peace, it is impossible.
I was not "Trolling". The fact is I don't trust "reports", they tend to be "one sided". People have it in for GWB, and most of the time I might agree. But the problems at the CIA and the contractor are probably have little to do with "policy" of "torture", and more than likely fall somewhere else.
But just because she happened to "blog" about "torture", that MUST be the reason for the firing. uh huh right.
Why is this on the front page of slashdot anyways?
Or is that what the contractor / software person is reporting?
There are hundreds of reasons people get fired, everyday. Even if it was over "blogging", it might not have been for criticizing "torture", but other reasons (secrecy, national defense etc). The problem is, it doesn't look good as it is reported, which is probably the whole point of this article anyway.
Bush bad Democrats good Amerika evil terrorism is freedom fighting (tell that to the burka wearing clitoris missing women) Israel bad peace at any cost........ crowd.
Just as bad as the "other side", IMHO. Evil comes in many forms, which form will you take?
I want a brand new BMW or Lexus, the ONLY option is to go to a dealer and buy one (or lease). They are so expenisive it is really a rotten deal. I wish there was an alternative.....
So your solution for me, would be to go and steal one? The problem is, there ARE alternatives, you just don't like them. There are ALWAYS alternatives.
". Just look at any war on "_subject_" and you'll see that it is always about the State being in control of the distribution or manufacturing of some product or service."
"They said that it was the most secure Windows so far; are you disputing this?"
In a single word.... YES.
Windows 1.0 and 2.0 were very secure by every measure that the current and more recent versions are measured, and defined as being.... "secure". I know of not one Network vulnerability in either of these two products, nor of vulnerabilities of virii and spyware, that directed attacks at that level.
Never mind that neither of these had networking in them, but that is besides the point. When people make claims such as.... "best" or "most" or.... whatever, they had better provide the definition of what they mean.
That, and if you decide to define "secure" as meaning the front door has triple deadbolts, a chain lock, and the screen doors, but fail to mention that the windows (pun intended) are left wide open, so that any common catburgler can crawl right through, then that definition of security does not meet mine, by any measure.
Security is a chain, of which is measured by the weakest link. "Most secure" means squat when the two chains have the same weak link in them.
So, all one has to do, is ask M$ by what measure do they mean "most secure Windows ever". Somehow I doubt that they will actually define what they mean by that statement, which then relegates it to Marketing Speak, i.e soundbites void of any real meaning.
Well, this was some... 20 something years ago, so the officers in question are probably not even on the force anymore. I don't hate "police", I just have a natural distrust for certain.... departments. Or as I like to say... Rodney King wasn't beat up because he was black, he was beat up because they were LA county sherrif deputies.
When the first two years you spend on the force, you spend guarding inmates at the county lockup, you are bound to have a jaded view of the world. LA County officers all spend their first two years as jail guards.
The other thing is, I think that they were intimitated by me for being 1) 9" taller than either of them 2) 50lbs heaver than either of them 3) smarter than both of them combined. Nothing intimidates more than intellegence, especially when you are being an idiot.
As for not sueing the sherrifs dept., it really wasn't a choice I had. I didn't have the $ to hire a lawyer, and no lawyer would take it on contingiency. The odds were stacked against me because I was not a "protected class" citizen. Which jaded my view of the whole civil rights movement.
How come, civil rights are for only certain people? How come, "protected class" doesn't include everyone? I am not saying that minorities aren't discriminated against, in fact, I know that they are, and often more than we would like to admit. However that shouldn't affect the rest of us negatively. Some people are asshats, can't help that.
Lastly, it wasn't the cops fault that charges were made against me... It was the District Attorney's! The DA should have known it was a loser case. My lawyer said that it was a rookie deputy DA trying the case, and the whole thing was set up for him to lose, just so he could get "experience".
Been there, done that. Have the arrest record to prove it, though I was found "not guilty" in a court of law. My lawyer said, because I was white, I couldn't sue. Had I been a minority, I could have sued for false arrest.
Yes, it was that bad. During the arrest, I asked "what am I being arrested for", they said... "Drunk in Public". Mind you, I was in a PRIVATE residence, and not intoxicated.
So, I said to the arresting officer.. "I'm neither drunk, nor in public". And after that, I said NOTHING.
The final charges were assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. Now mind you, I am 6'5" and very much had an athletic build of 225 lbs, brown belt in Judo, so if I had "resisted" arrest, I would have seriously injured me, or them or both. In addition, it seems that resisting a false arrest is completely legal, and as the police officers described it, they were arresting me when the so-called assault occured, not before.
Then, realizing their mistake, they said I threw a (can/bottle/cup) of beer on them. Notice that there are THREE answers given, which doesn't look good. Cup of beer is not assault, can and bottle might be, but the cops said there was a Keg at the party. The lying bastards couldn't get their story straight. I had cup, can and bottle at a kegger... yeah right a three fisted drinker!
The jury elected a foreman, and on the first vote found me "not guilty". And people wonder why I hate cops.
The funniest thing, was during the selection of the jury, one of the prospective jurors was asked why they couldn't sit on the jury. She said she had dealings with one of the arresting officers and said "He's an asshole". Truly hillarious. All the other jurors heard it too. Priceless.
Spelling often clarifies context/meaning. Phonetic spelling is awful vague in many cases.
I have to to many to choose from.
I have two too many to choose from.
Or how about this?
I killed the bor.
Do I mean I killed the Boar (wild pig), or Bore (someone who is boring?).
The problem is phonetics don't keep the word origins in mind. English is a conglomeration of Germanic, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Celtic, Gaelic and many other language families. It is both, its strength and its weakness.
I know right by looking that "Plumb" comes from the Greek word for lead (the element Pb) used in pipes. Whereas I know that plum (the fruit) comes from some other language. It also helps us track the changes to the cultural meanings of words through the years. If we go with phonetic spelling for everything, much of that might and probably will be lost.
I, one of many, wish to see Apple simply not offer iTMS to the French. In the words of a famous French Queen, "Let them eat cake"!
That way, all the iPod wearers can point at and call everyone who is wearing an MP3 player not made by Apple, some derogatory name. Please feel free to suggest terms to use below.
You imply disparity where there is none. It isn't XOR, it is AND. One can be a Smug homo (not that there is anything wrong with that) and choose a Mac, or one could be completely straight (or at least appear so) and turn into a smug Homo (not that there is anything wrong with that).
Being Smug or Homo (not that there is anything wrong with that) increases one's chances of being a Mac user exponentially. Be advised, there is always the rare exception where smug homos (not that there is anything wrong with that) chooses another OS like Linux or BeOS, just for the increased smugness levels. Vista may change all of this, but the odds of that are fairly remote.
Well, let's just say that I am a Libertarian, who realizes outlawing vices doesn't work, but also realizes that vices, almost by definition, have a detrimental effect on society. And to the level of the detriment, the level of regulation should be applied.
Prostitution has, and always will exist. It is also seen as detriment to society, in that uncontrolled prostitution leads to the spread of disease and other "pleasentries". Rather than outlaw it, it should be made legal and regulated and taxed according to the percieved detriment to society; i.e. pay for itself and its regulation.
Same with drugs, and all sorts of other vices. Society needs to be able to counter the detrimental effects of vices in a way that doesn't jeopordize my liberties in the attempt to stop other people from being idiots.
I also realize that among the Libertarian class, are the neo-anarchists, who want complete and unfettered access to all sorts of vices, not realizing that such vices DO affect others. I don't want prostitutes and drug dealers in my neighborhood. I don't like the kind of low-life trash they tend to attract, so it does affect me and thus my life is affected by others, and to that extent, I should be able to have some control over those... vices.
Libertarianism isn't necissarily opposed to taxes and regulations. It is opposed to FORCED taxes and regulations. Taxes should be "optional" in the sense that if you "use" (buy/sell/trade) something that is taxed, you are volunteering to pay/levy that tax.
Under democracy, Men rule men. Under socialism, it is the other way around. Libertarians rule themselves!
Why yes, I do. It is why I am a Libertarian. It is a huge waste of time, effort and money to stop drugs. Instead the government should regulate the HELL out of them like they do Cigarettes and Alcohol, and tax them into oblivian. Prolly would get rid of the Income Tax with the revenue.
AND it would clean up the Drug Cartel Violence found in Brazil, Argentina, Mexico.........
Depends upon your definition of "us" and "threat". I am reasonably sure that you wouldn't want to handle them without a full bio-hazard suit on, would you? That, and you are conveniently ignoring the fact that SH did have them, had used themm, wasn't complying with UN ordered inspections, etc etc etc.
"Were they going to come as proof in the form of a "mushroom cloud?" No."
Ummm, 20/20 hindsight is alway perfect, isn't it. Were you screaming "he has no weapons" before we invaded, or is that just a convenient excuse after the fact? I don't know ANYONE, including Kusinich who said they knew 100% for sure there were no WMDs, before we invaded. But I am sure that is beside the point for you, because you would bash the president no matter what.
Oh, and before you think I am a Bush lover, I am not. I hate Bush almost as much as I hated Clinton, Bush 41 and Carter... as presidents. All of them were lousy presidents for different reasons. Personally, I like all of them as Private Citizens, prolly all nice guys, and I wouldn't mind having a beer with any of them.
"I have watched in complete horror as thousands of people have been recklessly sent off to their deaths,"
I have watched, in complete horror as HUNDREDS of thousands of people die in Car Accidents, each year. Yet, I am not wanting to yank all cars off the road because of it. As for shooting conflicts some 2500-2600 deaths over 4 or 5 years is actually quite remarkably low. I do wish it was lower, or even none. But ignoring problems and hoping they go away is pitifully childish.
It is an UNFORTUNATE fact of life, people die. Aint nothing you can do to stop it. Some people die heroically, some as cowards. When cowards rule, more people die, they just die inside, not on the outside.
"right-wing parrot-heads have arrogantly screamed that those who objected on perfectly logical consistent grounds that there was no reason to dash wildly into this catastrophe were traitors or fools or Saddam-lovers."
Agreed. Buy why aren't you bashing the "left-wing parrot-heads" who have "arrogantly screamed"... quite literally,... unintelligable reasons for never using force against those that would kill them if they ever had a chance. You know the, the whole "Blame America" crowd over at Air-Amerika. I bash BOTH of the "extreme wings" of the DNC and the RNC.
To be honest, I think America should pull back from the world 100% of all it does for everyone else. That means starting with the UN, and all of our "forward deployed" troops and armaments. Stop giving "aid" to all the other countries. Let's see how the world works without the USA! It might even be cheaper too!
"It is FUCKING INSULTING and when I encounter that kind of shit I have decided I'm not sitting still for that."
Ahhh, the "F-Bomb". That wins EVERY arguement, doesn't it. Is that the most intellegent thing you can come up with? I am not sure what is insulting about copulation, except if your penis is in need of viagra or some "natural male enhancement" . I hear that "Bob" might be able help you with that problem of yours.
"Do you have an attribution for this? Do you have a source? Do you have any proof whatsoever, because as far as I recall, the initial march to Bagdhad was met with almost no resistance, and certainly nothing in the form of chemical or biological weaponry."
Right, the no-resistance was because they were waiting for Bagdad to break out the WMDs. Below is partial information regarding this. Because they didn't get the CW, they fled (abandon) their post. Please note, the CW suits were in excellent working condition, ready for immediate use.
Slashdot Mirror
"Israel and Hizbolla are both doing just that right now."
Ah, lets make no distinction between TRYING to hit civilian targets and trying to limit civilian targets by leafleting and bullhorning warnings.
Hezballah is hiding in civilian populations, hiding munitions in houses, mosques, schools and hospitals because it is IMPOSSIBLE to bomb them without civilian casualties. They USE civilians as sheild and the willing appologists love to trot out the corpses of little children and women, "innocent" deaths as if Israel is actively targeting them.
Meanwhile not a condemnation of bombers walking into a market and blowing themselves up, almost on a daily basis. Rockets fired indiscriminately into civilian populations. Marching little boys down the street with fully armed with rifles in hand.
You see, by equating civilian deaths, you have lined up with Hezballah.
"Yep. Equitable peace at any cost. Do you mean you prefer this forever war?"
How do you define "equitable". Israel has given 98% of what Palistine has asked. Gaza was forsaken, Golan was vacated. Only to have the terrorists move in, and start lobbing bombs into civilian cities. World outcry over a fence to keep them on the other side. Personally, I think Israel has bent over backwards trying to live in peace with its neighbors. Meanwhile, the surrounding countries have people sworn to the destruction of all Jews. So, please define "equitable" in terms that don't allow more bombs to be lobbed into a soverign state from its neighbors.
The only solution acceptable to some is Genocide. And until people realize that, and change it, there will be no peace, it is impossible.
I was not "Trolling". The fact is I don't trust "reports", they tend to be "one sided". People have it in for GWB, and most of the time I might agree. But the problems at the CIA and the contractor are probably have little to do with "policy" of "torture", and more than likely fall somewhere else.
But just because she happened to "blog" about "torture", that MUST be the reason for the firing. uh huh right.
Why is this on the front page of slashdot anyways?
Chubaka? Is that YOU?
Or is that what the contractor / software person is reporting?
.... crowd.
There are hundreds of reasons people get fired, everyday. Even if it was over "blogging", it might not have been for criticizing "torture", but other reasons (secrecy, national defense etc). The problem is, it doesn't look good as it is reported, which is probably the whole point of this article anyway.
Bush bad
Democrats good
Amerika evil
terrorism is freedom fighting (tell that to the burka wearing clitoris missing women)
Israel bad
peace at any cost....
Just as bad as the "other side", IMHO. Evil comes in many forms, which form will you take?
I want a brand new BMW or Lexus, the ONLY option is to go to a dealer and buy one (or lease). They are so expenisive it is really a rotten deal. I wish there was an alternative .....
So your solution for me, would be to go and steal one? The problem is, there ARE alternatives, you just don't like them. There are ALWAYS alternatives.
GO call the WAAAAAAAAMBULANCE.
"Wedding Evil SOBs"
;) Okay, so I had to poke a little fun. I think he means .... "weeding out".
So, they are getting married?
" how do I tell Sony-BMG or Apple that I don't accept the terms of their 'licensing agreement'? "
With your wallet!
If you don't like the terms, don't do the deal. Period, end of story.
No
I can't believe this one hasn't been thought of yet ....
....
Wide
Gaping
Asshole
After the reaming by Microsoft, that is all that you will have
UPS Dictionary says .....
Fragile (fra-gil-lay) from early French n. To toss about with reckless abandon.
". Just look at any war on "_subject_" and you'll see that it is always about the State being in control of the distribution or manufacturing of some product or service."
"War On Terror"
That is amazing! It works even for that!
"They said that it was the most secure Windows so far; are you disputing this?"
.... YES.
.... "secure". I know of not one Network vulnerability in either of these two products, nor of vulnerabilities of virii and spyware, that directed attacks at that level.
.... "best" or "most" or .... whatever, they had better provide the definition of what they mean.
In a single word
Windows 1.0 and 2.0 were very secure by every measure that the current and more recent versions are measured, and defined as being
Never mind that neither of these had networking in them, but that is besides the point. When people make claims such as
That, and if you decide to define "secure" as meaning the front door has triple deadbolts, a chain lock, and the screen doors, but fail to mention that the windows (pun intended) are left wide open, so that any common catburgler can crawl right through, then that definition of security does not meet mine, by any measure.
Security is a chain, of which is measured by the weakest link. "Most secure" means squat when the two chains have the same weak link in them.
So, all one has to do, is ask M$ by what measure do they mean "most secure Windows ever". Somehow I doubt that they will actually define what they mean by that statement, which then relegates it to Marketing Speak, i.e soundbites void of any real meaning.
Well, this was some ... 20 something years ago, so the officers in question are probably not even on the force anymore. I don't hate "police", I just have a natural distrust for certain .... departments. Or as I like to say ... Rodney King wasn't beat up because he was black, he was beat up because they were LA county sherrif deputies.
... It was the District Attorney's! The DA should have known it was a loser case. My lawyer said that it was a rookie deputy DA trying the case, and the whole thing was set up for him to lose, just so he could get "experience".
When the first two years you spend on the force, you spend guarding inmates at the county lockup, you are bound to have a jaded view of the world. LA County officers all spend their first two years as jail guards.
The other thing is, I think that they were intimitated by me for being 1) 9" taller than either of them 2) 50lbs heaver than either of them 3) smarter than both of them combined. Nothing intimidates more than intellegence, especially when you are being an idiot.
As for not sueing the sherrifs dept., it really wasn't a choice I had. I didn't have the $ to hire a lawyer, and no lawyer would take it on contingiency. The odds were stacked against me because I was not a "protected class" citizen. Which jaded my view of the whole civil rights movement.
How come, civil rights are for only certain people? How come, "protected class" doesn't include everyone? I am not saying that minorities aren't discriminated against, in fact, I know that they are, and often more than we would like to admit. However that shouldn't affect the rest of us negatively. Some people are asshats, can't help that.
Lastly, it wasn't the cops fault that charges were made against me
Someone had to be the guinee pig.
Been there, done that. Have the arrest record to prove it, though I was found "not guilty" in a court of law. My lawyer said, because I was white, I couldn't sue. Had I been a minority, I could have sued for false arrest.
... "Drunk in Public". Mind you, I was in a PRIVATE residence, and not intoxicated.
.. "I'm neither drunk, nor in public". And after that, I said NOTHING.
... yeah right a three fisted drinker!
Yes, it was that bad. During the arrest, I asked "what am I being arrested for", they said
So, I said to the arresting officer
The final charges were assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. Now mind you, I am 6'5" and very much had an athletic build of 225 lbs, brown belt in Judo, so if I had "resisted" arrest, I would have seriously injured me, or them or both. In addition, it seems that resisting a false arrest is completely legal, and as the police officers described it, they were arresting me when the so-called assault occured, not before.
Then, realizing their mistake, they said I threw a (can/bottle/cup) of beer on them. Notice that there are THREE answers given, which doesn't look good. Cup of beer is not assault, can and bottle might be, but the cops said there was a Keg at the party. The lying bastards couldn't get their story straight. I had cup, can and bottle at a kegger
The jury elected a foreman, and on the first vote found me "not guilty". And people wonder why I hate cops.
The funniest thing, was during the selection of the jury, one of the prospective jurors was asked why they couldn't sit on the jury. She said she had dealings with one of the arresting officers and said "He's an asshole". Truly hillarious. All the other jurors heard it too. Priceless.
Anyone else think Slashdot Icon for Patriot Act should be ..... Goat.cx guy? ANYONE?
Dear Legislator/Senator/Governor/President/Court Memeber/.....,
PLEASE LEAVE THE INTERNET ALONE. You will only screw it up, if you start messing with it.
Thanks,
Archangel Michael (on behalf of most of the Slashdot crowd)
Spelling often clarifies context/meaning. Phonetic spelling is awful vague in many cases.
I have to to many to choose from.
I have two too many to choose from.
Or how about this?
I killed the bor.
Do I mean I killed the Boar (wild pig), or Bore (someone who is boring?).
The problem is phonetics don't keep the word origins in mind. English is a conglomeration of Germanic, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Celtic, Gaelic and many other language families. It is both, its strength and its weakness.
I know right by looking that "Plumb" comes from the Greek word for lead (the element Pb) used in pipes. Whereas I know that plum (the fruit) comes from some other language. It also helps us track the changes to the cultural meanings of words through the years. If we go with phonetic spelling for everything, much of that might and probably will be lost.
IT was supposed to be a JOKE!
...
Not -1 Flaimbait
but rather
+1 Funny
SHEESH. BTW, My Wife is 1/2 French. Pffft
I, one of many, wish to see Apple simply not offer iTMS to the French. In the words of a famous French Queen, "Let them eat cake"!
That way, all the iPod wearers can point at and call everyone who is wearing an MP3 player not made by Apple, some derogatory name. Please feel free to suggest terms to use below.
Ummm
You imply disparity where there is none. It isn't XOR, it is AND. One can be a Smug homo (not that there is anything wrong with that) and choose a Mac, or one could be completely straight (or at least appear so) and turn into a smug Homo (not that there is anything wrong with that).
Being Smug or Homo (not that there is anything wrong with that) increases one's chances of being a Mac user exponentially. Be advised, there is always the rare exception where smug homos (not that there is anything wrong with that) chooses another OS like Linux or BeOS, just for the increased smugness levels. Vista may change all of this, but the odds of that are fairly remote.
It is all about Boolean Logic and raw statistics.
Well, let's just say that I am a Libertarian, who realizes outlawing vices doesn't work, but also realizes that vices, almost by definition, have a detrimental effect on society. And to the level of the detriment, the level of regulation should be applied.
... vices.
Prostitution has, and always will exist. It is also seen as detriment to society, in that uncontrolled prostitution leads to the spread of disease and other "pleasentries". Rather than outlaw it, it should be made legal and regulated and taxed according to the percieved detriment to society; i.e. pay for itself and its regulation.
Same with drugs, and all sorts of other vices. Society needs to be able to counter the detrimental effects of vices in a way that doesn't jeopordize my liberties in the attempt to stop other people from being idiots.
I also realize that among the Libertarian class, are the neo-anarchists, who want complete and unfettered access to all sorts of vices, not realizing that such vices DO affect others. I don't want prostitutes and drug dealers in my neighborhood. I don't like the kind of low-life trash they tend to attract, so it does affect me and thus my life is affected by others, and to that extent, I should be able to have some control over those
There is a place for NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard).
Libertarianism isn't necissarily opposed to taxes and regulations. It is opposed to FORCED taxes and regulations. Taxes should be "optional" in the sense that if you "use" (buy/sell/trade) something that is taxed, you are volunteering to pay/levy that tax.
Under democracy, Men rule men. Under socialism, it is the other way around. Libertarians rule themselves!
Why yes, I do. It is why I am a Libertarian. It is a huge waste of time, effort and money to stop drugs. Instead the government should regulate the HELL out of them like they do Cigarettes and Alcohol, and tax them into oblivian. Prolly would get rid of the Income Tax with the revenue.
.........
AND it would clean up the Drug Cartel Violence found in Brazil, Argentina, Mexico
"Were these discarded weapons a threat to us?"
... as presidents. All of them were lousy presidents for different reasons. Personally, I like all of them as Private Citizens, prolly all nice guys, and I wouldn't mind having a beer with any of them.
... quite literally, ... unintelligable reasons for never using force against those that would kill them if they ever had a chance. You know the, the whole "Blame America" crowd over at Air-Amerika. I bash BOTH of the "extreme wings" of the DNC and the RNC.
.iraq.chemical.suits/index.html
Depends upon your definition of "us" and "threat". I am reasonably sure that you wouldn't want to handle them without a full bio-hazard suit on, would you? That, and you are conveniently ignoring the fact that SH did have them, had used themm, wasn't complying with UN ordered inspections, etc etc etc.
"Were they going to come as proof in the form of a "mushroom cloud?" No."
Ummm, 20/20 hindsight is alway perfect, isn't it. Were you screaming "he has no weapons" before we invaded, or is that just a convenient excuse after the fact? I don't know ANYONE, including Kusinich who said they knew 100% for sure there were no WMDs, before we invaded. But I am sure that is beside the point for you, because you would bash the president no matter what.
Oh, and before you think I am a Bush lover, I am not. I hate Bush almost as much as I hated Clinton, Bush 41 and Carter
"I have watched in complete horror as thousands of people have been recklessly sent off to their deaths,"
I have watched, in complete horror as HUNDREDS of thousands of people die in Car Accidents, each year. Yet, I am not wanting to yank all cars off the road because of it. As for shooting conflicts some 2500-2600 deaths over 4 or 5 years is actually quite remarkably low. I do wish it was lower, or even none. But ignoring problems and hoping they go away is pitifully childish.
It is an UNFORTUNATE fact of life, people die. Aint nothing you can do to stop it. Some people die heroically, some as cowards. When cowards rule, more people die, they just die inside, not on the outside.
"right-wing parrot-heads have arrogantly screamed that those who objected on perfectly logical consistent grounds that there was no reason to dash wildly into this catastrophe were traitors or fools or Saddam-lovers."
Agreed. Buy why aren't you bashing the "left-wing parrot-heads" who have "arrogantly screamed"
To be honest, I think America should pull back from the world 100% of all it does for everyone else. That means starting with the UN, and all of our "forward deployed" troops and armaments. Stop giving "aid" to all the other countries. Let's see how the world works without the USA! It might even be cheaper too!
"It is FUCKING INSULTING and when I encounter that kind of shit I have decided I'm not sitting still for that."
Ahhh, the "F-Bomb". That wins EVERY arguement, doesn't it. Is that the most intellegent thing you can come up with? I am not sure what is insulting about copulation, except if your penis is in need of viagra or some "natural male enhancement" . I hear that "Bob" might be able help you with that problem of yours.
"Do you have an attribution for this? Do you have a source? Do you have any proof whatsoever, because as far as I recall, the initial march to Bagdhad was met with almost no resistance, and certainly nothing in the form of chemical or biological weaponry."
Right, the no-resistance was because they were waiting for Bagdad to break out the WMDs. Below is partial information regarding this. Because they didn't get the CW, they fled (abandon) their post. Please note, the CW suits were in excellent working condition, ready for immediate use.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/27/sprj.irq
"Memo: there's as much formaldehyde in a tomato as a can of diet soda. G
Okay, now that you let the cat out of the bag, how long before the Great Chinese Firewall gets this hole plugged?
On the otherhand, the more they try to squeeze star systems, the more they will slip out of thier han (or something like that).