But you could still put the cassowary in a plane or better yet a catapult. Real AI would be able to infer that any bird can fly.
I was told back in the '80s about an AI at MCC that was given the following problem:
A man owned a parrot. The man talked to the parrot every day. The parrot never learned to talk.
The AI responded:
The parrot is deaf.
That is certainly a great answer, but I am sure that I could come up with some other answers that are equally plausible:
The cage is soundproof. The parrot has no tongue. The parrot has brain damage. The parrot is pining for the fjords. It is an ex-parrot, 'hello Polly!', bang-bang-bang, dead as a door nail.
It would be interesting to see some of the inferences that this system has made and then check their accuracy.
If you slid a ball through his 2d plane, they'd see nothing, then a dot, then a widening circle, then a decreasing circle, then a dot, then nothing. If you were pushing a circle through, they'd see a nothing, a dot, a line (depending on the width of the circle) perhaps curved (depending on the angle of the circle), two lines moving away from each other, two dots, then two lines moving towards each other, a line, a dot and then nothing. If the circle was completely parallel, then they would see a circle.
I was unaware that physics had shown that there wasn't a 4th dimension. I'm not sure how physics or physicists could prove this. Perhaps what you meant to say was that the math currently used by most physicists does not need a 4th dimension.
When considering open source software, you should never, ever consider the costs of replacing an existing closed source system that works in every possible way with an inferior open source offering. You should consider instead all of the very fine software projects that are produced by the open source community. You should also remember that closed source systems are, by definition, thought and deed, inferior to any open source software, even when it isn't, don't be lazy, you stoopid noob, you have the source.
I apologize for this post about replacing closed source software with open source software in a discussion about the city of Munich replacing their closed source software with open source software. It is obviously off topic.
You and your ilk should really read some history books. The history of the human race is filled with literally rivers of blood and mountains of skulls. Having to fight face to face with a foe has never stopped a war from happening, ever. Even today, beyond the ivory towers you inhabit are people willing to strip the skin from your body to make a trophy for their trophy room.
It is true that there are orders of magnitude more Apple FanBois then Opera FanBois.
However, almost everyone likes choice and virtually no one likes being denied choice. I can't imagine that the EU could be very happy about this lack of choice, product tie in, extreme control and customer lock in. I seem to remember the EU having some tough laws applying to this sort of thing but maybe they only come into effect if MS is involved. I suspect once the numbers reach a certain point, millions or billions, it will become more difficult not to sanction this behavior with a fine and some crazy restitution.
So this is all Microsoft's fault? Who could ever have suspected the truly awesome extent of that evil fat bastard Ballmer's power? I was going to call you paranoid, but you may have won me over. Maybe some unfortunate running Vista can confirm your content control via DRM theory.
Apple has always been about customer lock in and micro-managing their slim market. They like to dabble in openness but it is just a facade, they keep their money makers closed in every sense of the word. The IPod/IPhone/IPad are just ways for Apple to get their user base to buy new hardware. In the past they would have changed architectures on the Mac line, but when they went to Intel they lost that trick.
Imagine what would happen if Microsoft brought out a tablet that could only install software hosted on a MSN server? I think who ever would suggest something like that would get laughed out of Redmund.
We learn new things all the time about our planet, the sun, the solar system and this wonderful universe. It wouldn't take long to make a list of things we only recently learned that overturned previous 'settled science'.
This has been a bad year for your side, so I can understand your obvious frustrations.
Short version: NASA wanted a project they could milk instead of something that worked with off the shelf parts. Bill and Al wanted to reward a blue state.
The sad thing is that if the US would just finish projects and hold contractors accountable we wouldn't be in the situation we are in with virtually no launch capacity and nothing in the works to build a space program around. The shuttle replacement programs is the poster child for what is wrong with NASA. Billions and years spent with no tangible results, poorly planned, poorly managed and killed with the wave of a pen.
We should replace NASA with multi-year X-Prizes. Take whatever money is supposed to go to the bureaucrats and careerists and give it to the people who have an actual passion for the work involved.
Unfortunately it is the whole country that loses in this case. I can remember well the day that Al Gore announced the shuttle replacement. The two finalists were a craft that had already been built and flight tested and another that existed as a powerpoint presentation that relied on technology that is still not feasible. The finalists that actually had built and tested their craft were passed over so that Bill and Al could provide a big fat payday to their wing nut allies in California.
This from the party that always cries about Republicans some how manipulating science for their own nefarious purposes.
It all makes sense now. I thought this was a strange move by Obama, but it is just like all of the other paybacks he has made since taking the Presidency.
Ender's Game, Antares Dawn, Startide Rising, Fire in the Deep, Armor
Great list. I would add "Legacy of Heorot", which would be easy to adapt and has a similar story to "Avatar" without making the majority of the humans look evil. Maybe when Arnie stops being a politician and returns to bad acting, er, acting bad, he could play Cadman Weyland.
I can't believe they made Vampire$ into a movie and not Armor. Although, the Starship troopers movie is more like Steakley then Heinlein.
Barbarella, which I haven't seen in a while, would be interesting to reboot. It would need to steal some elements from Iaan M. Bank's Culture universe. I would say just make a Culture movie, but the Hollywood suits would not have a frame of reference.
I have proof that Dora the Explorer is an agent of Culture. I'm just not sure if she is in Contact or Special Circumstances.
In addition to the emails that were leaked, a lot of raw data was also leaked, thus it was hidden. If the data was available, why wouldn't the scientists in question not have posted the link to RealClimate, like you have, instead of trying to figure out how not to comply with a FOI request? Unfortunately, even the link you provide is a small subset of the data and only a small subset of that is raw data.
Which leads directly to your second point. The only way to make the last century the hottest on record is to apply artificial adjustments. Without the artificial adjustments, the last century is not remarkable at all. Even with the artificial adjustments, previous IPCC reports showed the MWP as being hotter then today and it lasted longer then a century.
It's funny, in a sad way, to see negative effects (with respect to temp) like the Urban Warming Bias applied uniformly over time, which makes no sense at all, while the positive effects (again, with respect to temp) of things like TOBS and SHAP appear to increase over time, to the point that they completely dominate the results. There is no way that TOBS and SHAP could only increase over time. TOBS especially should be able to produce both negative and positive effects on temp and yet you don't see that reflected in the adjusted data.
Thankfully, the truth is coming out and the only ones complaining about it are on your side of the argument.
I'll give it a shot. The chemical/electrical processes in his head gets really turned on by the fact that individual bacterium communicate using chemicals. Feedback from the chemicals in his head make him dizzy thinking of the little notes passed back and forth like "good luck" and "you've changed since the last time we talked". Not one to RTFA, the chemicals in his head move on to the next story.
There, I explained how the chemical processes in his head could have not lead him to his decision that there is no decision. Whew, that was one tough sentence to parse. Hope that helped.
The famous 'chemical process in my head' defense. That's right up there with the 'Wookie defense'.
It's obvious none of these people saw the movie Troy. I'm thinking of the fight scene that introduces Achilles. Big angry guy vs smaller faster guy doesn't end well for the big angry guy.
You can see it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U1rq7keXTA
I agree, we should all check the evidence. That's what this whole argument is about. The Sith masters of climate 'science' want to hide the data, hide their methods and silence the debate. They believe it is justified to hide any flaws in their results under the pretense that it would only serve to strengthen their critics.
I do like your analogy, but you are wrong about the chronology. Episode I was the Phantom Menace of bad science infiltrating universities and labs. Episode II was the Attack of the Clones, when the bad science took hold and became settled science. Episode III is happening right now and you are right, it is the Revenge of the Science. Okay, maybe it's not such a great analogy.
In the mean time, if you can point out something wrong in my statements above, feel free to do so.
If it were only that simple. What the emails reveal, and what skeptics have been saying for a long time, is that the science is not independent, not reproducible and relies on the same flawed data sets and models used over and over, not multiple lines of evidence. In reality, the ice caps melt during summer and refreeze during winter and the arctic has increased in the last two years, in spite of the dire predictions of an ice free summer. The last 10 years is not the hottest on any records, not even the flawed ones, and is hardly unprecedented.
The hacked emails/data/code reveal plenty of disturbing things and in reality there is much more that has already come out that points to an even wider and more egregious perversion of science. It takes some serious cojones to use a data set that is known to diverge from the only unequivocal temperature record. You can't just hand wave the skeptics away by saying that the authors gave you a note allowing you to drop the data points that don't match up with your hypothesis,everything after 1960, and which go a long way in raising doubts about their significance prior to 1960.
Your side is being routed at this point and it is only going to get worse. Wait until the public learns how the current temperature data sets are being massaged, using only a few stations, sometimes hundreds of miles apart, and averaging for the most increase. How the rise in temperature is predominantly in areas that have no thermometers. How one small part of Antarctica that is warming has been overlaid over all of Antarctica to present the worst possible scenario.
You are right about the laws of physics, but you are sadly mistaken if you think this is a tempest in a teapot.
Whether you believe global warming is happening or has happened or stopped happening, you still believe in Climate Change. Cause the climate would have to have changed in either of those scenarios. If you believe, on the other hand, that the climate has never ever changed, then you can say you DO NOT believe in Climate Change.
I haven't seen a poll for that, but I would be surprised if it wasn't a tiny minority that does not believe in climate change.
So much for a noble profession. The new millennium is starting off by killing any pretense that a noble profession of any sort exists.
We can't trust politicians, that's a no-brainer. The press, don't make me laugh. Lawyers in general, judges? No trust there. Teachers and professors don't seem to command much respect these days. We're all for law and order, but how much do you really trust the cops? How about the cops in NYC or LA or NO? Scientists apparently have egos that allow them to do anything to further their cause. And now doctors would rather CYA then have their medical opinions opened to scrutiny.
Firefighters, that might be the last noble profession. Cue the scandal in 5...4...3...2...1...grrr!
A tiny percent of the population does not believe in Climate Change. You would have to be an idiot not to believe that the climate changes. If you believe in Global Warming, then don't be a putz and use Climate Change instead.
The 'Save the Polar Bear' wing of the AGW camp are not only trying to control the climate, they are trying to halt evolution. Polar bears, like all life, have the ability to adapt to survive whatever changes are coming.
The Sci-Fi vs Science Fiction debate is like watching two children fight over a toy in a room filled with toys, pointless and sad. It's like complaining about having too many choices in the desert bar at a buffet.
Let us examine the genre of 'standard' rampaging robots. Off the top of my head I can name several movies that feature rampaging robots:
Terminator (Natch), I Robot, RoboCop (ED-209), Star Trek (Nomad, VGER), Battlestar Galactica, 2001: A Space Odyssey ("I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."), Blade Runner (cyborgs count), Alien (same same), Star Wars ("He's more machine now than man; twisted and evil."), the Matrix, Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, Lost in Space, Transformers...
Some of these robots are similar, but in their own way they are all unique and easily identifiable. The robots range from small to ginormous, from human like to obviously machine. In some of the stories the robots are the chief antagonists in others they are the heroes and in a few they might be both or change roles in the sequels.
Obviously rampaging robots are within the realm of Science Fiction, so in that regard, to me, all of these movies are Science Fiction. From another person's perspective, clearly some of these are rather silly and believe should be labeled Sci-Fi. That distinction is really up to each of us to make and argue about.
I would argue for the science fictioness of each of those movies except Lost in Space and Transformers.
Boo hoo hoo, the US is so bad. We don't act with consistent morality and turn a blind eye to abuses. We only act when our interests are at stake. We pretend to be good guys who spread democracy and freedom when there are so many examples of doing the opposite.
We didn't force the Portuguese or the Indonesians to make East Timor it's own country, sob. I remember when they offered to make an independent nation of East Timor and we refused. Why? Because we're evil. Central and South America would be so much better off if we had just left them to the Europeans or allowed the communists to take over. The Europeans were always such benevolent masters.
Compare the people of Puerto Rico under the weight of US oppression to that of Cuba or Haiti. For shame! For shame! Why haven't we held elections and given them the option to leave, become a state or stay a province? Because we are evil.
We just didn't do enough, or too much or whatever your point was, I agree with you. I will take the road less traveled and expose the evils of the US. I will for ever more agree with the vast huddled masses around the world who would never leave their homelands to come to such a vile and despicable place and only yearn for freedom from the evil intentions of the US.
The Northern Alliance asked for our help in Afghanistan.
Iraq was under a cease fire agreement that they routinely broke, including trying to shoot down our planes over an agreed upon no-fly zone and also trying to assassinate an ex-President. Iraq also provided safe harbor to known terrorists and was a chief financier of terrorism through out the middle east.
It wouldn't bother me if the motto of the United States was changed to 'Sic Semper Tyrannis'.
Slashdot Mirror
But you could still put the cassowary in a plane or better yet a catapult. Real AI would be able to infer that any bird can fly.
I was told back in the '80s about an AI at MCC that was given the following problem:
A man owned a parrot. The man talked to the parrot every day. The parrot never learned to talk.
The AI responded:
The parrot is deaf.
That is certainly a great answer, but I am sure that I could come up with some other answers that are equally plausible:
The cage is soundproof.
The parrot has no tongue.
The parrot has brain damage.
The parrot is pining for the fjords.
It is an ex-parrot, 'hello Polly!', bang-bang-bang, dead as a door nail.
It would be interesting to see some of the inferences that this system has made and then check their accuracy.
If you slid a ball through his 2d plane, they'd see nothing, then a dot, then a widening circle, then a decreasing circle, then a dot, then nothing. If you were pushing a circle through, they'd see a nothing, a dot, a line (depending on the width of the circle) perhaps curved (depending on the angle of the circle), two lines moving away from each other, two dots, then two lines moving towards each other, a line, a dot and then nothing. If the circle was completely parallel, then they would see a circle.
I was unaware that physics had shown that there wasn't a 4th dimension. I'm not sure how physics or physicists could prove this. Perhaps what you meant to say was that the math currently used by most physicists does not need a 4th dimension.
When considering open source software, you should never, ever consider the costs of replacing an existing closed source system that works in every possible way with an inferior open source offering. You should consider instead all of the very fine software projects that are produced by the open source community. You should also remember that closed source systems are, by definition, thought and deed, inferior to any open source software, even when it isn't, don't be lazy, you stoopid noob, you have the source.
I apologize for this post about replacing closed source software with open source software in a discussion about the city of Munich replacing their closed source software with open source software. It is obviously off topic.
You and your ilk should really read some history books. The history of the human race is filled with literally rivers of blood and mountains of skulls. Having to fight face to face with a foe has never stopped a war from happening, ever. Even today, beyond the ivory towers you inhabit are people willing to strip the skin from your body to make a trophy for their trophy room.
Peer review does not trump reality, my friend.
It is true that there are orders of magnitude more Apple FanBois then Opera FanBois.
However, almost everyone likes choice and virtually no one likes being denied choice. I can't imagine that the EU could be very happy about this lack of choice, product tie in, extreme control and customer lock in. I seem to remember the EU having some tough laws applying to this sort of thing but maybe they only come into effect if MS is involved. I suspect once the numbers reach a certain point, millions or billions, it will become more difficult not to sanction this behavior with a fine and some crazy restitution.
So this is all Microsoft's fault? Who could ever have suspected the truly awesome extent of that evil fat bastard Ballmer's power? I was going to call you paranoid, but you may have won me over. Maybe some unfortunate running Vista can confirm your content control via DRM theory.
Apple has always been about customer lock in and micro-managing their slim market. They like to dabble in openness but it is just a facade, they keep their money makers closed in every sense of the word. The IPod/IPhone/IPad are just ways for Apple to get their user base to buy new hardware. In the past they would have changed architectures on the Mac line, but when they went to Intel they lost that trick.
Imagine what would happen if Microsoft brought out a tablet that could only install software hosted on a MSN server? I think who ever would suggest something like that would get laughed out of Redmund.
Hubris, much?
We learn new things all the time about our planet, the sun, the solar system and this wonderful universe. It wouldn't take long to make a list of things we only recently learned that overturned previous 'settled science'.
This has been a bad year for your side, so I can understand your obvious frustrations.
Short version: NASA wanted a project they could milk instead of something that worked with off the shelf parts. Bill and Al wanted to reward a blue state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_Graham
The sad thing is that if the US would just finish projects and hold contractors accountable we wouldn't be in the situation we are in with virtually no launch capacity and nothing in the works to build a space program around. The shuttle replacement programs is the poster child for what is wrong with NASA. Billions and years spent with no tangible results, poorly planned, poorly managed and killed with the wave of a pen.
We should replace NASA with multi-year X-Prizes. Take whatever money is supposed to go to the bureaucrats and careerists and give it to the people who have an actual passion for the work involved.
Unfortunately it is the whole country that loses in this case. I can remember well the day that Al Gore announced the shuttle replacement. The two finalists were a craft that had already been built and flight tested and another that existed as a powerpoint presentation that relied on technology that is still not feasible. The finalists that actually had built and tested their craft were passed over so that Bill and Al could provide a big fat payday to their wing nut allies in California.
This from the party that always cries about Republicans some how manipulating science for their own nefarious purposes.
It all makes sense now. I thought this was a strange move by Obama, but it is just like all of the other paybacks he has made since taking the Presidency.
Avoiding walking under ladders is common sense. If you had said avoid crossing the path of black cats, you might have been on to something.
Ender's Game, Antares Dawn, Startide Rising, Fire in the Deep, Armor
Great list. I would add "Legacy of Heorot", which would be easy to adapt and has a similar story to "Avatar" without making the majority of the humans look evil. Maybe when Arnie stops being a politician and returns to bad acting, er, acting bad, he could play Cadman Weyland.
I can't believe they made Vampire$ into a movie and not Armor. Although, the Starship troopers movie is more like Steakley then Heinlein.
Barbarella, which I haven't seen in a while, would be interesting to reboot. It would need to steal some elements from Iaan M. Bank's Culture universe. I would say just make a Culture movie, but the Hollywood suits would not have a frame of reference.
I have proof that Dora the Explorer is an agent of Culture. I'm just not sure if she is in Contact or Special Circumstances.
In addition to the emails that were leaked, a lot of raw data was also leaked, thus it was hidden. If the data was available, why wouldn't the scientists in question not have posted the link to RealClimate, like you have, instead of trying to figure out how not to comply with a FOI request? Unfortunately, even the link you provide is a small subset of the data and only a small subset of that is raw data.
Which leads directly to your second point. The only way to make the last century the hottest on record is to apply artificial adjustments. Without the artificial adjustments, the last century is not remarkable at all. Even with the artificial adjustments, previous IPCC reports showed the MWP as being hotter then today and it lasted longer then a century.
It's funny, in a sad way, to see negative effects (with respect to temp) like the Urban Warming Bias applied uniformly over time, which makes no sense at all, while the positive effects (again, with respect to temp) of things like TOBS and SHAP appear to increase over time, to the point that they completely dominate the results. There is no way that TOBS and SHAP could only increase over time. TOBS especially should be able to produce both negative and positive effects on temp and yet you don't see that reflected in the adjusted data.
Thankfully, the truth is coming out and the only ones complaining about it are on your side of the argument.
I'll give it a shot. The chemical/electrical processes in his head gets really turned on by the fact that individual bacterium communicate using chemicals. Feedback from the chemicals in his head make him dizzy thinking of the little notes passed back and forth like "good luck" and "you've changed since the last time we talked". Not one to RTFA, the chemicals in his head move on to the next story.
There, I explained how the chemical processes in his head could have not lead him to his decision that there is no decision. Whew, that was one tough sentence to parse. Hope that helped.
The famous 'chemical process in my head' defense. That's right up there with the 'Wookie defense'.
It's obvious none of these people saw the movie Troy. I'm thinking of the fight scene that introduces Achilles. Big angry guy vs smaller faster guy doesn't end well for the big angry guy. You can see it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U1rq7keXTA
I agree, we should all check the evidence. That's what this whole argument is about. The Sith masters of climate 'science' want to hide the data, hide their methods and silence the debate. They believe it is justified to hide any flaws in their results under the pretense that it would only serve to strengthen their critics.
I do like your analogy, but you are wrong about the chronology. Episode I was the Phantom Menace of bad science infiltrating universities and labs. Episode II was the Attack of the Clones, when the bad science took hold and became settled science. Episode III is happening right now and you are right, it is the Revenge of the Science. Okay, maybe it's not such a great analogy.
In the mean time, if you can point out something wrong in my statements above, feel free to do so.
If it were only that simple. What the emails reveal, and what skeptics have been saying for a long time, is that the science is not independent, not reproducible and relies on the same flawed data sets and models used over and over, not multiple lines of evidence. In reality, the ice caps melt during summer and refreeze during winter and the arctic has increased in the last two years, in spite of the dire predictions of an ice free summer. The last 10 years is not the hottest on any records, not even the flawed ones, and is hardly unprecedented.
The hacked emails/data/code reveal plenty of disturbing things and in reality there is much more that has already come out that points to an even wider and more egregious perversion of science. It takes some serious cojones to use a data set that is known to diverge from the only unequivocal temperature record. You can't just hand wave the skeptics away by saying that the authors gave you a note allowing you to drop the data points that don't match up with your hypothesis ,everything after 1960, and which go a long way in raising doubts about their significance prior to 1960.
Your side is being routed at this point and it is only going to get worse. Wait until the public learns how the current temperature data sets are being massaged, using only a few stations, sometimes hundreds of miles apart, and averaging for the most increase. How the rise in temperature is predominantly in areas that have no thermometers. How one small part of Antarctica that is warming has been overlaid over all of Antarctica to present the worst possible scenario.
You are right about the laws of physics, but you are sadly mistaken if you think this is a tempest in a teapot.
You are assuming it was cherry picked, just as many are assuming that CRU was hacked from the outside.
If the researchers in question have emails that make the leaked emails look better, there is nothing stopping them from releasing (or leaking) them.
Whether you believe global warming is happening or has happened or stopped happening, you still believe in Climate Change. Cause the climate would have to have changed in either of those scenarios. If you believe, on the other hand, that the climate has never ever changed, then you can say you DO NOT believe in Climate Change.
I haven't seen a poll for that, but I would be surprised if it wasn't a tiny minority that does not believe in climate change.
So much for a noble profession. The new millennium is starting off by killing any pretense that a noble profession of any sort exists.
We can't trust politicians, that's a no-brainer. The press, don't make me laugh. Lawyers in general, judges? No trust there. Teachers and professors don't seem to command much respect these days. We're all for law and order, but how much do you really trust the cops? How about the cops in NYC or LA or NO? Scientists apparently have egos that allow them to do anything to further their cause. And now doctors would rather CYA then have their medical opinions opened to scrutiny.
Firefighters, that might be the last noble profession. Cue the scandal in 5...4...3...2...1...grrr!
A tiny percent of the population does not believe in Climate Change. You would have to be an idiot not to believe that the climate changes. If you believe in Global Warming, then don't be a putz and use Climate Change instead.
The 'Save the Polar Bear' wing of the AGW camp are not only trying to control the climate, they are trying to halt evolution. Polar bears, like all life, have the ability to adapt to survive whatever changes are coming.
The Sci-Fi vs Science Fiction debate is like watching two children fight over a toy in a room filled with toys, pointless and sad. It's like complaining about having too many choices in the desert bar at a buffet.
Let us examine the genre of 'standard' rampaging robots. Off the top of my head I can name several movies that feature rampaging robots:
Terminator (Natch), I Robot, RoboCop (ED-209), Star Trek (Nomad, VGER), Battlestar Galactica, 2001: A Space Odyssey ("I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."), Blade Runner (cyborgs count), Alien (same same), Star Wars ("He's more machine now than man; twisted and evil."), the Matrix, Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, Lost in Space, Transformers...
Some of these robots are similar, but in their own way they are all unique and easily identifiable. The robots range from small to ginormous, from human like to obviously machine. In some of the stories the robots are the chief antagonists in others they are the heroes and in a few they might be both or change roles in the sequels.
Obviously rampaging robots are within the realm of Science Fiction, so in that regard, to me, all of these movies are Science Fiction. From another person's perspective, clearly some of these are rather silly and believe should be labeled Sci-Fi. That distinction is really up to each of us to make and argue about.
I would argue for the science fictioness of each of those movies except Lost in Space and Transformers.
You have made me see the error of my beliefs...
Boo hoo hoo, the US is so bad. We don't act with consistent morality and turn a blind eye to abuses. We only act when our interests are at stake. We pretend to be good guys who spread democracy and freedom when there are so many examples of doing the opposite.
We didn't force the Portuguese or the Indonesians to make East Timor it's own country, sob. I remember when they offered to make an independent nation of East Timor and we refused. Why? Because we're evil. Central and South America would be so much better off if we had just left them to the Europeans or allowed the communists to take over. The Europeans were always such benevolent masters.
Compare the people of Puerto Rico under the weight of US oppression to that of Cuba or Haiti. For shame! For shame! Why haven't we held elections and given them the option to leave, become a state or stay a province? Because we are evil.
We just didn't do enough, or too much or whatever your point was, I agree with you. I will take the road less traveled and expose the evils of the US. I will for ever more agree with the vast huddled masses around the world who would never leave their homelands to come to such a vile and despicable place and only yearn for freedom from the evil intentions of the US.
The Northern Alliance asked for our help in Afghanistan.
Iraq was under a cease fire agreement that they routinely broke, including trying to shoot down our planes over an agreed upon no-fly zone and also trying to assassinate an ex-President. Iraq also provided safe harbor to known terrorists and was a chief financier of terrorism through out the middle east.
It wouldn't bother me if the motto of the United States was changed to 'Sic Semper Tyrannis'.