Yes I would feel comfortable if the ICANN resided in China the entire time, and no serious issues had arisen. This is very similar to how we Amercians are generally comfortable with relying on Chinese manufacturing and imports.
Do you realize that you're supporting the notion of a totalitarian government renowned for silencing, often brutally, any talk of democracy or any anti-government speech, in charge of the free flow of information in this world?
Irregardless of any future US- Chinese conflicts, they are simply not fond of free speech.
Nobody minded this too much[1] while you were seen as trustworthy, democratic, meritocratic, the least corrupt and the most "free" (libre) society on earth.
No, they didn't mind it because they needed our protection from being crushed by the russians. Now that there's no global threat, other countries and societies freely piss and whine about everything they think is wrong with America. Rather tiresome, really.
Ever heard the saying "When the US sneezes, the whole world catches cold?"
These various countries are buying our debt and trading with us and using our dollars for oil because it is in their financial interest to do so, and trying to fuck us to make a political point would hurt them as well, probably more so.
I'd be willing to bet that if you plotted world economic growth with US economic growth, you'd see the correlation was strong. It's a two way street, they need us as much as- or more than- we need them.
People here spouting Fuck Em comments about the UN should ask themselves why they identify so much with their government. Why this sudden rush of Us and Them?
I don't have to love my government to realize that the United Nations is the most worthless, corrupt, incompetent organization on the face of this earth, who's very structure- putting tinpot dictatorships on equal footing with 200+ year old democracys- is fundamentally flawed.
The US has entered its teenage years. It's rebellious, strong, and anti-authority, and hasn't learned not to be so self-centered. It will grow out of it, eventually, if enough good people guide it the right way. This might be a good learning experience for it.
That's a funny thing to say considering the US Government has been continually in power, in basically it's current form, for longer than most of the other countries on this planet- europe included.
The reason the UN wants control is to stop the internet from being laissez-faire. Germans want to erase neo-nazis from the net, which may not be so bad, but China wants to shut down tibetan and falun gong sites, etc, etc. They want to put the information genie back in the bottle. Your condescending paternalism towards the United States shows an ignorance of the more sinister motives behind such a move, and an unrealistic faith in the benevolence of other more 'mature' (hah! how many revolutions have occured in Europe in the last century or so?) countries.
Sure, the US ain't perfect, but as it stands right now, the Internet is the ultimate bastion of free speech. Giving control to the UN would end that, and I'd sooner see the internet fracture than the US cave to such a craven action.
For now Im stuck in a lower paying job, doing mostly non-engineering type work (of the mechanical type, at least), waiting and telling myself Ill continue on and get a real engineering job soon...
Yeah, I got my mechanical engineering degree, and passed my EIT (I have no idea how- I walked out halfway through the second part after making half-assed back of the envelope calculations on all the questions)but I don't work in exactly 'mechanical engineering'.
That being said, I get paid very well for someone two years out of school (probably better than most people i graduated with)for being a nuclear power plant operator, and have a rather established career path that could have me in upper management in 15 years or so if I play my cards right.
Yeah, it's not engineering, but it's (at times) intellectually demanding, while not being incredibly physical. Only downside really is I have to work shifts.
Just sayin there are good options out there, even lacking your PE license. Good luck!
I would say that the correct action in this case would have been to exercise some common sense and NOT to position the nuclear weapons into Turkey in the first place. Eisenhower was very correct in noting that the step would be considered as "provocative".
Yeah, no disagreement there. The USSR should have bitched about us putting nukes in turkey. Basically it was a game of taking what advantages you could, and denying your opponent the same.
The key to international security is really just common sense and respect from all parties. Hauling up nukes to someones backyard and expecting them to accept it is not common sense. Crying wolf when they do the same to you is also not common sense (since you sort of asked for it)?
No sane person purposely lets a potential enemy gain such a close striking position. Any war you get involved in, or might, isn't about a fair fight, it's about winning with the fewest casualties to our own side.
Really, do you think the American public would be okay with not even trying to stop russia from putting nukes in cuba? Nukes aimed at us?
Westinghouse 3411 PWR now undergoing power uprate.
When I say things generally don't fail spontanously- I'm not sure if you're a nuke insider, and I'm not positive how it works at other plants, but I know how incredibly anal we are at preventive maintance and condition monitoring of plant equipment.
INPO also publishes what's known as Operating Experience, whereby the incidents you mention at various plants are learned from and methods of preventing the incident from recurring are reviewed or implemented. Sure, there have been incidents- Davis Besse is probably the best example of a near-catastrophic (in terms of plant operation and ability to recover, not health and safety of the public) oversight in recent history.
Calling Davis Besse an 'oversight' is a bit generous, I admit, but you can bet your ass that won't happen again at any US plant. A number of nuke plants have replaced (or are planning to replace) their vessel heads- while mine is perfectly fine, we have a spare on site anyway:P.
So anyway, my perspective is that of a 2 year power plant operator at a specific site. When I say nuclear power is safe, it's from the knowledge of all the depths we go to at my plant to make sure things work properly, the accidents we prepare for, the scenarios we drill, the threshold for condition reports and reporting equipment deficencies- we're very over designed and very cautious and critical of everything we do.
Anyway, looks like we're more or less on the same page. Thanks for the info.
nuclear power seems not to be justified economically
My nuke plant makes money hand over fist for the parent company, and we're in a deregulated market. You have no idea just how cheap uranium is for it's heat output.
nuclear power produces some seriously polluting byproducts.
Sure, if we dumped it outside- but we don't. I know where all the waste from my plant is. Can a coal or oil plant say the same thing?
Between the (relatively) low profit margins on the nuclear industry (it's heavily subsidized to stay afloat), the difficulty in maintaining hot core elements, and the extreme risks from part failures, it's not an easy task.
Mostly good information, but I wanted to clear up a few things, at least from the perspective of my nuke plant (Operates as a baseload unit in a de-regulated state).
1. We make tons of money, and we recieve no subsidies. Everytime we buy fuel, we pay into a fund that goes towards long-term fuel storage, and oftentimes we pay for the presence of the NRC often as well. The term 'baseload' refers to the fact that we make electricity cheaper than anyone else, so as grid demand falls, we're the last to reduce power output(in effect, we always operate at full power.)
2. Extreme risk from equipment failures- hardly. The entire plant is designed with the knowledge that parts fail, and there is plenty of redundancy in the system. Moreover, we monitor the integrity of all the systems, the state of all the pumps and the operability of all the valves on a routine basis. Things typically don't fail spontaneously and disasterously, and we initiate corrective action whenever we see performance declining.
In *perfect operation*, the entire nuclear cycle releases about as much radiation into the atmosphere (depends on the study - one study I saw showed as little as half as much) as coal power plants.
I don't know what happens to the fuel before it gets to the plant, but afterwards, we don't release any radioactive particles into the atmosphere.
Sure, there are places in the plant were there are radiation fields, but workers don't spend a lot of time in such areas, and it certainly doesn't get out to the public.
You probably already know, but think of a radiation source as a lightbulb. Stick your face in it and you'll see spots in your eyes for several minutes.
On the other hand, if you look at it during the night from 100 yards away, you'll hardly get any light in your retina.
Coal plants release radioactive particles into the air. Nuke plants emit radiation, but such radiation is stopped by concrete and water before it ever harms anyone.
Containment structures....While not invulnerable (a buildup of hydrogen gas, a liquid sodium/concrete detonation, etc)
Three mile island had numerous hydrogen explosions inside their containment building, and it held. Since my plant was built after three mile island, we have hydrogen recombiners in containment so that the h2 never reaches flammable levels. We also have a system designed to reduce pressure in containment from a massive steam leak, and to remove radioactive iodine from the building before it ever gets a chance to escape. Moreover, the building itself is insanely well built, and it has another, stronger building outside of it. The containment structure is designed, with a huge margin of safety, to withstand any conceivable accident from within.
The inner containment building is a pressure vessel, the outer containment building is a missile barrier designed to withstand airplane impacts. Knowing the construction of the buildings, I dare say they could withstand any calamity short of a bonafide enemy air force dropping bunker busters onto it.
As for liquid sodium- we don't have any in my plant.
The flaws and vulnerabilities of each power plant generation are corrected in the next, and many of the problems you mentioned have been corrected, or will be corrected in subsequent designs.
Anyway, thank you for the otherwise informative post. The above is just from the perspective of my plant, which is widely regarded as one of the safest, cleanest, well-run facilities in the industry. (WANO rating of 100, INPO 1. Use google)
for one claiming to be female- unless the pussy you own is a cat in a formahylide jar- you sure come off as the typical 14 year old boy looking for a flamefest.
I wouldn't put my face on an online sex partner site. I'd probably put a picture of more than just my dick, though.
It's the kind of thing that could come up later when one is applying for a high-profile job, trying to get elected, or could just get you burned at the place you do work at. If you avoid putting up a picture of your face online, then the only way someone could actually connect you to the site would be to meet you for sex- and in such a situation, they wouldn't speak of it either.
I have no idea why so many women put their faces up on those sites, it can come to haunt them later.
I don't dissagree that a self-selected communist society can viable for quite some time- i.e. communes- but that doesn't change the fact that any whole nation that goes down the path of communism must necessarily be authoritarian as well.
Yeah. Did you know that if the senate voted 98-0 on that, both DEMOCRATS and REPUBLICANS, pretty much as a whole, rejected it outright? And the two Senators who were originally for it pussied out and abstained instead?
Do you really think that anyone, even the great evil genius Karl Rove, could turn the entire senate around just a few years later?
Not. Gonna. Happen. Regardless. Of. President.
There are fundamental problems with the Kyoto treaty such that every single senator either thought: 1. This is the worst idea ever. 2. My consituents will crucify me, and worse yet, not re-elect me.
98-0. Out of 100. The only possible conclusion one could come to is that a political body voting in such a way would never pass the item rejected.
The president does not control congress. He gets his way sometimes, and sometimes he doesn't. You must have absolutely no understanding of American Politics or it's structure to think that anyone could ressurect Kyoto in the United States.
Hmm, the analysis I read said that at most over the 50 years it would delay the US by 6 months, reaching in December 2050 the level of wealth you would have got in July of that year without Kyoto. Big difference.
The nice thing about predictions, especially long term, is that those making them can create results that support their agenda. The more complex the system being modeled, the shadier the reliability of any prediction is.
Just sayin'
Also, when congress voted 98-0 against the Kyoto treaty near the end of Clinton's term, it shows you that whatever the sitting president thinks of the kyoto treaty is irrelevant.
No such luck buddy, I cut and paste a lot from my archive of these things. You are not the first fascist I run into, by a long shot.
This is a pretty fuckin sad hobby. I can see getting into an argument from time to time, but if it's your full time entertainment, that's pathetic. You know this is all pointless, don't you?
You: 24 comments in the past three days Me: 24 comments in the past two months. Most of them with you.
Oh, you're a canadian. Isn't that the country that takes pride in being insignificant? And bases it's entire identity on being not the US?
I can tell from your posts you eagerly bite into every anti-US propaganda that falls your way. You don't seek out the good news coming from Iraq- and there is plenty- so you think it's a total failure (remember the old press axioms: If it bleeds, it leads, and no news is good news)
As for the entire Israel/Palestine issue- a muslim in Israel has it a lot better than a jew in a muslim country. Some of the lands Israel has that you like to call a 50 year old illegal occupation were lost to Israel when the surrounding countries attacked- and lost. Seems perfectly fair to me. For someone so concerned about the sanctity of life, you're giving alot of pass to palestinians, who start to murder Israelis anytime they receive concessions or peace looks imminent. Looks all rather convienent.
We tried treating al-qaida and crew as criminals under the clinton administration. Didn't work, we got 9-11 for the effort.
As for fucking things up and expecting you to come up with a plan- which consisted mostly of put our tails between our legs and run- I don't expect you to do a damn thing. It would be a freakin miracle if any lefty canadian actually accomplished anything requiring the slightest ambition.I only asked because you seem quite confident in your vast intellect. Though, i suppose, as a lefty canadian you'd be quite adept at forming up large, expensive, and useless government beuracracies.
Oh yeah, and the other half your plan after the running part- catch them at the border? Why don't you ask the French how that maginot line worked.
Since it appears you've been studiously avoiding any good news about Iraq, at all, here's a link for you: Good news from Iraq part 25
Please feel free to browse parts 1-24 as well, and Chrenkoff will post part 26 sometime in the next day or so.
You're basically a raving moonbat lefty who probably can't be bothered to do anything more than show up at a pointless anti-american rally with a poorly made sign. I'm not running anything either, so that basically makes us equal.
I suppose, at this point, it's good neither of us is running anything. If you were in charge of anything, you'd be too damn busy plugging holes in the dike (American border, and you only have ten fingers) and worrying about the fluffyness of terrorist's pillows to prevent anything from actually occuring.
If I was in charge, we'd have a few more glass parking lots in the world.
Have a nice day, and it was a pleasure getting you 20 deep into a thread, if only to keep you from posting your pansy-ass anti-american drivel at a level where someone would read it.
Slashdot Mirror
And read I did. Good stuff. Still doesn't make any sense of your original statement that I objected to, but small matter I suppose.
Yes I would feel comfortable if the ICANN resided in China the entire time, and no serious issues had arisen. This is very similar to how we Amercians are generally comfortable with relying on Chinese manufacturing and imports.
Do you realize that you're supporting the notion of a totalitarian government renowned for silencing, often brutally, any talk of democracy or any anti-government speech, in charge of the free flow of information in this world?
Irregardless of any future US- Chinese conflicts, they are simply not fond of free speech.
Nobody minded this too much[1] while you were seen as trustworthy, democratic, meritocratic, the least corrupt and the most "free" (libre) society on earth.
No, they didn't mind it because they needed our protection from being crushed by the russians. Now that there's no global threat, other countries and societies freely piss and whine about everything they think is wrong with America. Rather tiresome, really.
Ever heard the saying "When the US sneezes, the whole world catches cold?"
These various countries are buying our debt and trading with us and using our dollars for oil because it is in their financial interest to do so, and trying to fuck us to make a political point would hurt them as well, probably more so.
I'd be willing to bet that if you plotted world economic growth with US economic growth, you'd see the correlation was strong. It's a two way street, they need us as much as- or more than- we need them.
People here spouting Fuck Em comments about the UN should ask themselves why they identify so much with their government. Why this sudden rush of Us and Them?
I don't have to love my government to realize that the United Nations is the most worthless, corrupt, incompetent organization on the face of this earth, who's very structure- putting tinpot dictatorships on equal footing with 200+ year old democracys- is fundamentally flawed.
The less the UN runs, the better.
The US has entered its teenage years. It's rebellious, strong, and anti-authority, and hasn't learned not to be so self-centered. It will grow out of it, eventually, if enough good people guide it the right way. This might be a good learning experience for it.
That's a funny thing to say considering the US Government has been continually in power, in basically it's current form, for longer than most of the other countries on this planet- europe included.
The reason the UN wants control is to stop the internet from being laissez-faire. Germans want to erase neo-nazis from the net, which may not be so bad, but China wants to shut down tibetan and falun gong sites, etc, etc. They want to put the information genie back in the bottle. Your condescending paternalism towards the United States shows an ignorance of the more sinister motives behind such a move, and an unrealistic faith in the benevolence of other more 'mature' (hah! how many revolutions have occured in Europe in the last century or so?) countries.
Sure, the US ain't perfect, but as it stands right now, the Internet is the ultimate bastion of free speech. Giving control to the UN would end that, and I'd sooner see the internet fracture than the US cave to such a craven action.
For now Im stuck in a lower paying job, doing mostly non-engineering type work (of the mechanical type, at least), waiting and telling myself Ill continue on and get a real engineering job soon...
Yeah, I got my mechanical engineering degree, and passed my EIT (I have no idea how- I walked out halfway through the second part after making half-assed back of the envelope calculations on all the questions)but I don't work in exactly 'mechanical engineering'.
That being said, I get paid very well for someone two years out of school (probably better than most people i graduated with)for being a nuclear power plant operator, and have a rather established career path that could have me in upper management in 15 years or so if I play my cards right.
Yeah, it's not engineering, but it's (at times) intellectually demanding, while not being incredibly physical. Only downside really is I have to work shifts.
Just sayin there are good options out there, even lacking your PE license. Good luck!
Someone should tell IFPI Finland.... that having customers is a privelege, not a right. Hit them in the wallet if it pisses you off- don't buy.
After a few times of playing the sock game with a certain cat, it learned to use it's paws to remove the sock.
Took a while though.
I would say that the correct action in this case would have been to exercise some common sense and NOT to position the nuclear weapons into Turkey in the first place. Eisenhower was very correct in noting that the step would be considered as "provocative".
Yeah, no disagreement there. The USSR should have bitched about us putting nukes in turkey. Basically it was a game of taking what advantages you could, and denying your opponent the same.
The key to international security is really just common sense and respect from all parties. Hauling up nukes to someones backyard and expecting them to accept it is not common sense. Crying wolf when they do the same to you is also not common sense (since you sort of asked for it)?
No sane person purposely lets a potential enemy gain such a close striking position. Any war you get involved in, or might, isn't about a fair fight, it's about winning with the fewest casualties to our own side.
Really, do you think the American public would be okay with not even trying to stop russia from putting nukes in cuba? Nukes aimed at us?
Westinghouse 3411 PWR now undergoing power uprate.
:P.
When I say things generally don't fail spontanously- I'm not sure if you're a nuke insider, and I'm not positive how it works at other plants, but I know how incredibly anal we are at preventive maintance and condition monitoring of plant equipment.
INPO also publishes what's known as Operating Experience, whereby the incidents you mention at various plants are learned from and methods of preventing the incident from recurring are reviewed or implemented. Sure, there have been incidents- Davis Besse is probably the best example of a near-catastrophic (in terms of plant operation and ability to recover, not health and safety of the public) oversight in recent history.
Calling Davis Besse an 'oversight' is a bit generous, I admit, but you can bet your ass that won't happen again at any US plant. A number of nuke plants have replaced (or are planning to replace) their vessel heads- while mine is perfectly fine, we have a spare on site anyway
So anyway, my perspective is that of a 2 year power plant operator at a specific site. When I say nuclear power is safe, it's from the knowledge of all the depths we go to at my plant to make sure things work properly, the accidents we prepare for, the scenarios we drill, the threshold for condition reports and reporting equipment deficencies- we're very over designed and very cautious and critical of everything we do.
Anyway, looks like we're more or less on the same page. Thanks for the info.
nuclear power seems not to be justified economically
My nuke plant makes money hand over fist for the parent company, and we're in a deregulated market. You have no idea just how cheap uranium is for it's heat output.
nuclear power produces some seriously polluting byproducts.
Sure, if we dumped it outside- but we don't. I know where all the waste from my plant is. Can a coal or oil plant say the same thing?
Between the (relatively) low profit margins on the nuclear industry (it's heavily subsidized to stay afloat), the difficulty in maintaining hot core elements, and the extreme risks from part failures, it's not an easy task.
Mostly good information, but I wanted to clear up a few things, at least from the perspective of my nuke plant (Operates as a baseload unit in a de-regulated state).
1. We make tons of money, and we recieve no subsidies. Everytime we buy fuel, we pay into a fund that goes towards long-term fuel storage, and oftentimes we pay for the presence of the NRC often as well. The term 'baseload' refers to the fact that we make electricity cheaper than anyone else, so as grid demand falls, we're the last to reduce power output(in effect, we always operate at full power.)
2. Extreme risk from equipment failures- hardly. The entire plant is designed with the knowledge that parts fail, and there is plenty of redundancy in the system. Moreover, we monitor the integrity of all the systems, the state of all the pumps and the operability of all the valves on a routine basis. Things typically don't fail spontaneously and disasterously, and we initiate corrective action whenever we see performance declining.
In *perfect operation*, the entire nuclear cycle releases about as much radiation into the atmosphere (depends on the study - one study I saw showed as little as half as much) as coal power plants.
I don't know what happens to the fuel before it gets to the plant, but afterwards, we don't release any radioactive particles into the atmosphere.
Sure, there are places in the plant were there are radiation fields, but workers don't spend a lot of time in such areas, and it certainly doesn't get out to the public.
You probably already know, but think of a radiation source as a lightbulb. Stick your face in it and you'll see spots in your eyes for several minutes.
On the other hand, if you look at it during the night from 100 yards away, you'll hardly get any light in your retina.
Coal plants release radioactive particles into the air. Nuke plants emit radiation, but such radiation is stopped by concrete and water before it ever harms anyone.
Containment structures....While not invulnerable (a buildup of hydrogen gas, a liquid sodium/concrete detonation, etc)
Three mile island had numerous hydrogen explosions inside their containment building, and it held. Since my plant was built after three mile island, we have hydrogen recombiners in containment so that the h2 never reaches flammable levels. We also have a system designed to reduce pressure in containment from a massive steam leak, and to remove radioactive iodine from the building before it ever gets a chance to escape. Moreover, the building itself is insanely well built, and it has another, stronger building outside of it. The containment structure is designed, with a huge margin of safety, to withstand any conceivable accident from within.
The inner containment building is a pressure vessel, the outer containment building is a missile barrier designed to withstand airplane impacts. Knowing the construction of the buildings, I dare say they could withstand any calamity short of a bonafide enemy air force dropping bunker busters onto it.
As for liquid sodium- we don't have any in my plant.
The flaws and vulnerabilities of each power plant generation are corrected in the next, and many of the problems you mentioned have been corrected, or will be corrected in subsequent designs.
Anyway, thank you for the otherwise informative post. The above is just from the perspective of my plant, which is widely regarded as one of the safest, cleanest, well-run facilities in the industry. (WANO rating of 100, INPO 1. Use google)
There are such things as 'dating sites' which do make a distinction.
Oh jeez, men put their dick pics on sites that are actually for relationship type dating, and not f*** and forgets?
Wow. Well, at least it helps the women browsing them sort out the idiots faster.
for one claiming to be female- unless the pussy you own is a cat in a formahylide jar- you sure come off as the typical 14 year old boy looking for a flamefest.
I wouldn't put my face on an online sex partner site. I'd probably put a picture of more than just my dick, though.
It's the kind of thing that could come up later when one is applying for a high-profile job, trying to get elected, or could just get you burned at the place you do work at. If you avoid putting up a picture of your face online, then the only way someone could actually connect you to the site would be to meet you for sex- and in such a situation, they wouldn't speak of it either.
I have no idea why so many women put their faces up on those sites, it can come to haunt them later.
I don't dissagree that a self-selected communist society can viable for quite some time- i.e. communes- but that doesn't change the fact that any whole nation that goes down the path of communism must necessarily be authoritarian as well.
You can have authoritarianism without communism, but you cannot have communism without authoritarianism.
Yeah. Did you know that if the senate voted 98-0 on that, both DEMOCRATS and REPUBLICANS, pretty much as a whole, rejected it outright? And the two Senators who were originally for it pussied out and abstained instead?
Do you really think that anyone, even the great evil genius Karl Rove, could turn the entire senate around just a few years later?
Not. Gonna. Happen.
Regardless. Of. President.
There are fundamental problems with the Kyoto treaty such that every single senator either thought:
1. This is the worst idea ever.
2. My consituents will crucify me, and worse yet, not re-elect me.
98-0. Out of 100. The only possible conclusion one could come to is that a political body voting in such a way would never pass the item rejected.
The president does not control congress. He gets his way sometimes, and sometimes he doesn't. You must have absolutely no understanding of American Politics or it's structure to think that anyone could ressurect Kyoto in the United States.
Hmm, the analysis I read said that at most over the 50 years it would delay the US by 6 months, reaching in December 2050 the level of wealth you would have got in July of that year without Kyoto. Big difference.
The nice thing about predictions, especially long term, is that those making them can create results that support their agenda. The more complex the system being modeled, the shadier the reliability of any prediction is.
Just sayin'
Also, when congress voted 98-0 against the Kyoto treaty near the end of Clinton's term, it shows you that whatever the sitting president thinks of the kyoto treaty is irrelevant.
No such luck buddy, I cut and paste a lot from my archive of these things. You are not the first fascist I run into, by a long shot.
This is a pretty fuckin sad hobby. I can see getting into an argument from time to time, but if it's your full time entertainment, that's pathetic. You know this is all pointless, don't you?
You: 24 comments in the past three days
Me: 24 comments in the past two months. Most of them with you.
Driving into a gunfight. huh. Don't suppose you've heard of darwin awards, have you?
Oh yeah, here's a different point of view on that reuters cameraman link from alertnet. I think he does a decent job of explaining it:
Nicedoggie.net
Oh, you're a canadian. Isn't that the country that takes pride in being insignificant? And bases it's entire identity on being not the US?
I can tell from your posts you eagerly bite into every anti-US propaganda that falls your way. You don't seek out the good news coming from Iraq- and there is plenty- so you think it's a total failure (remember the old press axioms: If it bleeds, it leads, and no news is good news)
As for the entire Israel/Palestine issue- a muslim in Israel has it a lot better than a jew in a muslim country. Some of the lands Israel has that you like to call a 50 year old illegal occupation were lost to Israel when the surrounding countries attacked- and lost. Seems perfectly fair to me. For someone so concerned about the sanctity of life, you're giving alot of pass to palestinians, who start to murder Israelis anytime they receive concessions or peace looks imminent. Looks all rather convienent.
We tried treating al-qaida and crew as criminals under the clinton administration. Didn't work, we got 9-11 for the effort.
As for fucking things up and expecting you to come up with a plan- which consisted mostly of put our tails between our legs and run- I don't expect you to do a damn thing. It would be a freakin miracle if any lefty canadian actually accomplished anything requiring the slightest ambition.I only asked because you seem quite confident in your vast intellect. Though, i suppose, as a lefty canadian you'd be quite adept at forming up large, expensive, and useless government beuracracies.
Oh yeah, and the other half your plan after the running part- catch them at the border? Why don't you ask the French how that maginot line worked.
Since it appears you've been studiously avoiding any good news about Iraq, at all, here's a link for you: Good news from Iraq part 25
Please feel free to browse parts 1-24 as well, and Chrenkoff will post part 26 sometime in the next day or so.
You're basically a raving moonbat lefty who probably can't be bothered to do anything more than show up at a pointless anti-american rally with a poorly made sign. I'm not running anything either, so that basically makes us equal.
I suppose, at this point, it's good neither of us is running anything. If you were in charge of anything, you'd be too damn busy plugging holes in the dike (American border, and you only have ten fingers) and worrying about the fluffyness of terrorist's pillows to prevent anything from actually occuring.
If I was in charge, we'd have a few more glass parking lots in the world.
Have a nice day, and it was a pleasure getting you 20 deep into a thread, if only to keep you from posting your pansy-ass anti-american drivel at a level where someone would read it.