the only way US companies were invovled with Sadam in the 90's would have been though selling stuff to french and German companies since the US had no deals in the oil for food program.
and yes, of course we knew what a mad man he was in the 80's, but we were in the middle of the cold war and had to make a deal with him in order to stop Iran which was Backed by the Russians.
are we to condem the US and the allies for teaming up with the Soviets in the 40's to fight Hitler? we knew what a mad man Stolin was, but we still gave him weapons, ammo and resources.
was the Iran/Iraq war on the scale of WW2? no,but durringthe cold war, the policy of containment dictated that we support what ever side was counter the side that was supported by the soviets.
the question is not who sold stuff to Saddam in the 80's. the question is who was abusing the Oil for food program and helping Saddam in the UN AFTER HE HAD BEEN MADE AN INTERNATIONAL PARIA!!
first, elements of the french government (elements does not mean the government) were in bed with Saddam in order to enrich themselves at the price of the Iraqi people.
excuse me, but getting a bandwidth is not the same as unlimited downloading.
you are given unlimited internet access, you are guaronteed a level of bandwidth, but you are not guaronteed unlimited downloads, so they can ned your access or retard it if you begin to take an in ordinate amount of bandwidth on the system.
actualy, they send the warnings because the cost of supporting 1% of the users who use 70% of the bandwidth is to much and interfears with the other 99% of users.
Slashdot Mirror
excuse me, it is COMANDER Trip, not cap'n
(BTW, I think the reason that Cap'n Crunch uses the term Cap'n and not Captain is because the marketers could not spell Captain)
umm, if you are out of warrenty and your battery dies,
a) you have no warrenty to void
b) you cannot buy apple care after the first year
so what the hell is keeping some one from replacing the battery on their own? sheer stupidity.
the only way US companies were invovled with Sadam in the 90's would have been though selling stuff to french and German companies since the US had no deals in the oil for food program.
and yes, of course we knew what a mad man he was in the 80's, but we were in the middle of the cold war and had to make a deal with him in order to stop Iran which was Backed by the Russians.
are we to condem the US and the allies for teaming up with the Soviets in the 40's to fight Hitler? we knew what a mad man Stolin was, but we still gave him weapons, ammo and resources.
was the Iran/Iraq war on the scale of WW2? no,but durringthe cold war, the policy of containment dictated that we support what ever side was counter the side that was supported by the soviets.
I meant mojo, and by dirt house, I meant a house made of dirt.
yeah, and what is funnier is that they did not have to make up stupid jokes to make it a comedy.
the question is not who sold stuff to Saddam in the 80's. the question is who was abusing the Oil for food program and helping Saddam in the UN AFTER HE HAD BEEN MADE AN INTERNATIONAL PARIA!!
exactly, the technologies in the Camache are pointless, unless they made them impervious to Fundamentalists with RPGs.
does it really matter?
Stealth? what good is radar Stealth when your enemy is some uneducated dirt house living mojo with a, RPG?
you know what, the Irony of your Soviet Russia comment is that the weapons REALLY DID SCRAP YOU!!!
this was on the same track as the Bradley fighting vehicle.
thank god they scraped this thing.
when you say things that people in power do not want to hear, they shut you up.
but the UN is a group of courup jerks.
first, elements of the french government (elements does not mean the government) were in bed with Saddam in order to enrich themselves at the price of the Iraqi people.
now the UN is selling out to Microsoft.
how about condensing the atmosphere with a chemical reaction, causing the nasty stuff to fall to the surface as a solid.
just make a nanotube pipe and send it down to suck out the venician atmosphere.
except that these are high voltage wires so the signal can travel hundres of miles.
complaints they get because people are not following the law.
excuse me, but getting a bandwidth is not the same as unlimited downloading.
you are given unlimited internet access, you are guaronteed a level of bandwidth, but you are not guaronteed unlimited downloads, so they can ned your access or retard it if you begin to take an in ordinate amount of bandwidth on the system.
its allin the fine print.
because powerlines have High voltages so they can carry signals much much much much farther than the low voltage lines that phone signals travel on.
High winds and stores already knock out cable and telephone lines in suburbs and rural areas...what is the diffrence?
if you say so. I like their service, and I have no bandwidth caps...I leave them alone and they leave me alone ;-)
actualy, they send the warnings because the cost of supporting 1% of the users who use 70% of the bandwidth is to much and interfears with the other 99% of users.
the FCC will have to mandate retrofiting the powerlines with some sort of sheilding.
by the time this gets to most people, it will cost 70 bucks a month I bet.
it does for the lawyer who got 50 % of the procedes.
yeah, here is a tip....when your wife has a chance at an awsome job, let her take it.
if she had taken the NYU job, you were wide open for columbia.
only the big PC companies...
Alienware and Apple do not do such things.