First many of those vocal people went in Rawnda under the form of a ONG. So do not put them down they did a good work with what they had.
Second the problem is that when you are speaking of intervention you are always thinking "wagging war one one side" as seen in Somalia (and Kossovo). And that remind a lot of the other "intervention" I can think of since the 50' And I think this is were the US go wrong, and why mostly why people hate the US.
But in Rwanda IMO what was sorely needed is mostly help for the refugee and simply an international presence to shill down agression fron the other side. Not bombing of the population. Furthermore there was nothing really commercial to gain there. Perhaps I am seeing too much evil were only disinterrest is, but I think that was the two main point why US never bothered considering rwanda.
The problem is that such movie present only one side , "the patriotic ethical one" of the matter, and present it as if it was good (US coming to rescue) versus bad (somalian war chief).
But reality isn't clear cut "black and white" it is mostly gray (and all the clor of the rainbow). There had been vested interrest there if you take care to read all the report circulating around there (and if you do not reject them as "anti american propaganda").
Now I am not saying that those report are true. They may be biased. But one has to wonder, for example, why intervene in Somalian (to stop people "stealing" food), whereas leave masaker and genocide go on in Rwanda.
Maybe Rwanda lacks raw ressource to be interresting...
But bottom line is this : As long as you put an historic event in film you are going to stray from the truth. If only because raw historical event are boring to the mass without a bit of blood, sex, explosion, treason, and heroic acts.
It is a big firm in Europa.
AFAIK we do not use the above mentionend standard but we use another standard for baggage check in and baggage follow up.
The system is so complex that even *us* the programmer have sometimes difficulty with it. The hic is the following : would it be worth for a terrorist to learn the system when they can get it easier to fake the control band of the baggage with the so called "bag tag" (simple paper a serial number and a code bar) or have an insider in the baggage loading worker team.
On the other hand 6 monthes ago I would have said "terrorist learning to fly a plane to pill it into a building ? Unprobable. They could do things in a far easier way than such a long term plan.".
So maybe we have to starts worry...
I am not experienced in OOP programming anymore, especially how good the compiler are now, but maybe OOP is mostly used for its inheritance in data structure , and reusability of the code (enhance UI, management problem etc...).
On the other hand, physic and mathematic problem require usage of pure processing power on calcul. Maybe OOP would help add an UI layer, but using data structure with OOP in raw calcul might add an innacceptable "slow down".
Addictiveness is not defined by isolated incident but by the way a population react to a product. Most people will react addictively (more or less depeding on their biology) but they will all react addictevly within set parameter.
OTOH you are speaking of isolated incident from people which *had* particular weakness. Which is not a real indicator of addictiveness of video game. A real study would involve a big population of gamer.
And seeing how those rare isolated incident are, I would guess that it would prove that video game are as addictive as reading, or other old fashioned gaming.
If it was so "easy" there would be far more of those device on every plane to spread terror.
Probably far more economical than train people to fly plane to strike two tower.
I am not saying that the article at salon.com is wrong , only that it leaves probably important fact. Like how do look such explosive device with a detonator inside on a Xray film ? Probably suspect , something you do not await in an electronic device.
But then again that is only my opinion, not fact. I can only say you that from what I know of airport security it is at least enough.
The concorde accident was caused by a plane piece which damaged the tire and blew , which the subsequently damaged the tank.
Furthermore the design and technology behind both plane are different, and have what , 30 years of difference in their design. They weren't even designed by the same team of ingenieur.
Their only common point is probably that they aren't american plane.
And by looking at the [negative] score of what you posted in the past, you are most likely doing that right now.
Instead of trying to fuel hate fire, how about making well constructed opinion post ?
I work in the airline industry and around here every bagage is at least screened using X-rays.
If it doesn't get explosive it at least catch electronical device. And "opaque" bagage are set aside for torough checking so forget using a X-Ray stopping cover to hide anything.
First you can say everything on France fighting during WW2 , but not "cowardice". True the strategy of the general at that time was pityful, they thougth themselves back to WW1.
But French resisted the occupation. Do I have to remind you what happened to the people caught, which incidently were flagged as "terrorist" ?
Furthermore , if you really want to recall everybody of what they fatehr/great father/ur father made wrong, let me remind you of the *genocide* your ancestor made in what is now the U.S. Wasn't there an amer-indian population before you (nearly) killed them all, and stole all their land ?
We have a nice proverb in France : "Before looking at the small twig in your neighbourgh yard look at the big trunk in your own yard."
Slashdot Mirror
First many of those vocal people went in Rawnda under the form of a ONG. So do not put them down they did a good work with what they had. Second the problem is that when you are speaking of intervention you are always thinking "wagging war one one side" as seen in Somalia (and Kossovo). And that remind a lot of the other "intervention" I can think of since the 50' And I think this is were the US go wrong, and why mostly why people hate the US. But in Rwanda IMO what was sorely needed is mostly help for the refugee and simply an international presence to shill down agression fron the other side. Not bombing of the population. Furthermore there was nothing really commercial to gain there. Perhaps I am seeing too much evil were only disinterrest is, but I think that was the two main point why US never bothered considering rwanda.
The problem is that such movie present only one side , "the patriotic ethical one" of the matter, and present it as if it was good (US coming to rescue) versus bad (somalian war chief). But reality isn't clear cut "black and white" it is mostly gray (and all the clor of the rainbow). There had been vested interrest there if you take care to read all the report circulating around there (and if you do not reject them as "anti american propaganda"). Now I am not saying that those report are true. They may be biased. But one has to wonder, for example, why intervene in Somalian (to stop people "stealing" food), whereas leave masaker and genocide go on in Rwanda. Maybe Rwanda lacks raw ressource to be interresting... But bottom line is this : As long as you put an historic event in film you are going to stray from the truth. If only because raw historical event are boring to the mass without a bit of blood, sex, explosion, treason, and heroic acts.
So usually when i do not know the exact word for something, I try to guess how it could be in english :).
It is a big firm in Europa. AFAIK we do not use the above mentionend standard but we use another standard for baggage check in and baggage follow up. The system is so complex that even *us* the programmer have sometimes difficulty with it. The hic is the following : would it be worth for a terrorist to learn the system when they can get it easier to fake the control band of the baggage with the so called "bag tag" (simple paper a serial number and a code bar) or have an insider in the baggage loading worker team. On the other hand 6 monthes ago I would have said "terrorist learning to fly a plane to pill it into a building ? Unprobable. They could do things in a far easier way than such a long term plan.". So maybe we have to starts worry...
I am not experienced in OOP programming anymore, especially how good the compiler are now, but maybe OOP is mostly used for its inheritance in data structure , and reusability of the code (enhance UI, management problem etc...). On the other hand, physic and mathematic problem require usage of pure processing power on calcul. Maybe OOP would help add an UI layer, but using data structure with OOP in raw calcul might add an innacceptable "slow down".
Addictiveness is not defined by isolated incident but by the way a population react to a product. Most people will react addictively (more or less depeding on their biology) but they will all react addictevly within set parameter. OTOH you are speaking of isolated incident from people which *had* particular weakness. Which is not a real indicator of addictiveness of video game. A real study would involve a big population of gamer. And seeing how those rare isolated incident are, I would guess that it would prove that video game are as addictive as reading, or other old fashioned gaming.
If it was so "easy" there would be far more of those device on every plane to spread terror. Probably far more economical than train people to fly plane to strike two tower. I am not saying that the article at salon.com is wrong , only that it leaves probably important fact. Like how do look such explosive device with a detonator inside on a Xray film ? Probably suspect , something you do not await in an electronic device. But then again that is only my opinion, not fact. I can only say you that from what I know of airport security it is at least enough.
The concorde accident was caused by a plane piece which damaged the tire and blew , which the subsequently damaged the tank. Furthermore the design and technology behind both plane are different, and have what , 30 years of difference in their design. They weren't even designed by the same team of ingenieur. Their only common point is probably that they aren't american plane.
And by looking at the [negative] score of what you posted in the past, you are most likely doing that right now. Instead of trying to fuel hate fire, how about making well constructed opinion post ?
I work in the airline industry and around here every bagage is at least screened using X-rays. If it doesn't get explosive it at least catch electronical device. And "opaque" bagage are set aside for torough checking so forget using a X-Ray stopping cover to hide anything.
First you can say everything on France fighting during WW2 , but not "cowardice". True the strategy of the general at that time was pityful, they thougth themselves back to WW1. But French resisted the occupation. Do I have to remind you what happened to the people caught, which incidently were flagged as "terrorist" ? Furthermore , if you really want to recall everybody of what they fatehr/great father/ur father made wrong, let me remind you of the *genocide* your ancestor made in what is now the U.S. Wasn't there an amer-indian population before you (nearly) killed them all, and stole all their land ? We have a nice proverb in France : "Before looking at the small twig in your neighbourgh yard look at the big trunk in your own yard."