What you don't understand is that our foreign policy is a failure.
Over the last 30 years or so, our policies, from all Presidents and mainly regarding Israel and oil, have alienated a small but significant portion of the world. It has gotten to the point where a military solution is not possible. Iran has 60-70 million people. Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia each have roughly 20 million. While it's obvious that not all of this population is as anti-american as the hardliners, like any sovereign country, they simply will not accept a foreign occupation.
It is not rational to believe that the US can control the policies of every nation in the world. We simply must accept that there are some atrocities and injustices that will go on. Indeed, we already do this, as we haven't sent troops to Sudan, and didn't send troops to Rwanda.
It is at the point, in my opinion, where we must radically alter our approach to the Middle East. The idea that a sovereign nation is not allowed to develop or purchase weapons is ludicrous. Such a policy is inherently unfair and does nothing except to breed resentment and hatred. Realist theory dictates that nation-states will act primarily to secure themselves above anything else. Cutting a state off does not promote their security. Naturally, it does the opposite. What happens is you get a situation like North Korea. Without a change in policy, I believe the Iran situation is headed down this road.
So my question to you is, if we continue down the path of cutting Iran off and attempting to dictate policy halfway around the world, when they do get nukes (and they will, it's inevitable), what will your solution be?
The "flypaper" theory has absolutely no credibility. It was invented after all of the other excuses for this sorry mess were debunked.
Even if we accept the theory as truth, it clearly isn't working. It's a failed strategy. Attacks in Iraq are getting more frequent and more deadly by the day. The Middle East is obviously less stable than it was before this whole thing by any measure. Afghanistan is not stable and the Taliban has not been eliminated. Bin Laden.. who?
I don't think it's as you present it. A significant portion of the Spanish electorate was already against their participation in Iraq. The bombings did not change that. Indeed, it wasn't the bombings that switched the vote, it was the administration's response to the bombings. AQ may have gained a talking point, but in terms of practicality and reality, they achieved nothing. People who buy into the idea that AQ actually made a difference in Spain are very likely to believe a multitude of other myths perpetuated by the group. Indeed, your insistence that AQ made a difference could be construed as unwittingly assisting the group's propaganda efforts.
If AQ's pointing to political changes as demonstration of their power is the yardstick, then AQ has soundly won the "War on Terror". Just look at the reactions today. They didn't even have to pull off a successful attack, and here we are shitting ourselves about shampoo.
The election manipulation aspect of the Madrid attack is overblown. If the government hadn't immediately pointed to Basque terrorists, the result may not have been the same. Furthermore, what did AQ really gain? The withdrawl of Spanish troops from Iraq? Yeah, that *really* changed the situation in Iraq. Spain had a whole fucking 1,300 troops there. That's 1% of the troops that the US has there.
You bold the bit about faithless electors, but in reality this is an insignificant phenomenon. In the event the faithless electors actually swayed the election, the provisions of the rules of the Congress could be executed. This solution isn't foolproof, but I'd think that in the event an election was stolen in this manner, there would be quite an outcry.
I'm surprised that MS isn't including an option to install unsigned drivers, and I bet there will be a backdoor way to do this in Vista. The reason I believe this is that if you can only install MS-approved drivers, it sets up a ton of liability for MS if one of those drivers ruins something. Yeah, it says they're not liable in the EULA, but we'll see how that holds up in court.
Lists like that are severely flawed, imo. Look how many are "charter", "magnet" or "academy" schools. Yes, they're public schools, but there is usually competition to get into these schools and if you don't make it, then you could be stuck in the broken part of the system.
For instance, there are 3 Dallas schools on the list. Makes you think Dallas has a great system, right?
The odds that a student entering the ninth grade in Dallas public schools will earn a regular diploma are hardly better than a coin toss. This horrific graduation rate is low even when compared to other large metro school districts. Of the 100 largest school districts in the United States, Dallas public schools rank 80th in overall graduation rate.
A speedway is a dedicated facility for auto racing and time trials. The european term is usually "circuit". It's much better than a road for this purpose. No traffic and the safety barriers are designed for high-speed impacts (including gravel traps at many facilities).
In general, the cheapest food is the least healthy. A lot of people (morons, if you ask me) feel that we already spend too much on schools. Therefore, corners are cut to save money. It generally doesn't go as far as putting a McDonald's in the school, but many lunchrooms are contracted out to companies like Aramark who are only interested in the bottom line. Selling chips and soda brings in the money. Selling fruit doesn't.
This is an absolutely horrible idea. You cannot make a legislator a criminal just by the course of their official duties. In fact, that's in the Constitution, Art I, Sec 6.
It is not the legislature's job to determine whether laws are constitutional. It is the legislature's job to pass laws that they feel will benefit the state.
In many cases, there is no way of knowing if a law is constitutional until SCOTUS rules on it. They don't accept pre-emptive cases and they don't issue opinions on potential legislation. In case you didn't notice, there is more than one way to interpret the Congressional powers outlined in the Constitution. You essentially want to make it illegal to have a difference in opinion. Ridiculous.
Yeah I had looked at that while composing my response. The thing is, this system would also give 'false negatives' if there were no vehicles seen at both locations. I guess that is the status quo, but it seems like a very low cost/benefit, with a very high big brother factor. After all, it's not every day that there's a sniper spree.
Those stations are bullshit. The NYC metro area is gigantic and there is traffic in every corner. It is not possible for those stations to report on every traffic incident in the 30 seconds that they get. Therefore, they tend to focus on bridges/tunnels, then the routes in/out of the city center, and then only the seriously major delays are mentioned for everything else.
I don't think that would have worked to catch the sniper. The shootings were spread over a very wide area. You have to hope that the killer uses highways or other major roads within a short time of the shootings, you'd have to deal with false positives, etc.
HERE's an idea, put stick on scan labels by all the veggies so once bagged they can just be weighed and scanned instead of having to key in the code by HAND
Some Wegmans stores have this setup. IMO, it's easier the "low tech" way. Working the scale is just as annoying as working the self-checkout line. And if your produce isn't in the list of codes (might be a special or something), forget about it.
This post shows a critical misunderstanding of anti-trust law. Simply having a monopoly is completely legal. Spreading FUD is, in general, completely legal. It is improper use of a monopoly position which is illegal, and that's what got MS into trouble. They used their OS monopoly to wedge into the browser market (among other things).
Waco and Ruby Ridge were both disasters that could have been avoided. However, both Weaver and Koresh were accussed of committing crimes and would not allow the authorities to investigate or apprehend them. What would you like the government to do when this occurs? Just back down?
Would you be so sympathetic if these were black people in the ghetto?
Slashdot Mirror
What you don't understand is that our foreign policy is a failure.
Over the last 30 years or so, our policies, from all Presidents and mainly regarding Israel and oil, have alienated a small but significant portion of the world. It has gotten to the point where a military solution is not possible. Iran has 60-70 million people. Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia each have roughly 20 million. While it's obvious that not all of this population is as anti-american as the hardliners, like any sovereign country, they simply will not accept a foreign occupation.
It is not rational to believe that the US can control the policies of every nation in the world. We simply must accept that there are some atrocities and injustices that will go on. Indeed, we already do this, as we haven't sent troops to Sudan, and didn't send troops to Rwanda.
It is at the point, in my opinion, where we must radically alter our approach to the Middle East. The idea that a sovereign nation is not allowed to develop or purchase weapons is ludicrous. Such a policy is inherently unfair and does nothing except to breed resentment and hatred. Realist theory dictates that nation-states will act primarily to secure themselves above anything else. Cutting a state off does not promote their security. Naturally, it does the opposite. What happens is you get a situation like North Korea. Without a change in policy, I believe the Iran situation is headed down this road.
So my question to you is, if we continue down the path of cutting Iran off and attempting to dictate policy halfway around the world, when they do get nukes (and they will, it's inevitable), what will your solution be?
The "flypaper" theory has absolutely no credibility. It was invented after all of the other excuses for this sorry mess were debunked.
Even if we accept the theory as truth, it clearly isn't working. It's a failed strategy. Attacks in Iraq are getting more frequent and more deadly by the day. The Middle East is obviously less stable than it was before this whole thing by any measure. Afghanistan is not stable and the Taliban has not been eliminated. Bin Laden.. who?
Be nice to your local farmer; you may end up depending on him to produce food for you.
I already do. CSA's are the way to go.
Cigarettes don't cause people to become unproductive.
They sure as hell do when you go out for a 10-minute smoke break once an hour.
Watching that video of him learning how to play golf is one of the saddest and lamest things I've ever seen.
What video? Anyone got a link? I searched and one of the top results was this thread..
I don't think it's as you present it. A significant portion of the Spanish electorate was already against their participation in Iraq. The bombings did not change that. Indeed, it wasn't the bombings that switched the vote, it was the administration's response to the bombings. AQ may have gained a talking point, but in terms of practicality and reality, they achieved nothing. People who buy into the idea that AQ actually made a difference in Spain are very likely to believe a multitude of other myths perpetuated by the group. Indeed, your insistence that AQ made a difference could be construed as unwittingly assisting the group's propaganda efforts.
If AQ's pointing to political changes as demonstration of their power is the yardstick, then AQ has soundly won the "War on Terror". Just look at the reactions today. They didn't even have to pull off a successful attack, and here we are shitting ourselves about shampoo.
The election manipulation aspect of the Madrid attack is overblown. If the government hadn't immediately pointed to Basque terrorists, the result may not have been the same. Furthermore, what did AQ really gain? The withdrawl of Spanish troops from Iraq? Yeah, that *really* changed the situation in Iraq. Spain had a whole fucking 1,300 troops there. That's 1% of the troops that the US has there.
You bold the bit about faithless electors, but in reality this is an insignificant phenomenon. In the event the faithless electors actually swayed the election, the provisions of the rules of the Congress could be executed. This solution isn't foolproof, but I'd think that in the event an election was stolen in this manner, there would be quite an outcry.
I'm surprised that MS isn't including an option to install unsigned drivers, and I bet there will be a backdoor way to do this in Vista. The reason I believe this is that if you can only install MS-approved drivers, it sets up a ton of liability for MS if one of those drivers ruins something. Yeah, it says they're not liable in the EULA, but we'll see how that holds up in court.
For instance, there are 3 Dallas schools on the list. Makes you think Dallas has a great system, right?Oh. (source)
A speedway is a dedicated facility for auto racing and time trials. The european term is usually "circuit". It's much better than a road for this purpose. No traffic and the safety barriers are designed for high-speed impacts (including gravel traps at many facilities).
My friends and I found a sweet de-activated logging road one day with trees growing in the middle of the road that were 2 meters tall.
So the logging company was actually being responsible and re-planted. What did you do? Destroyed em. Yeah, really sweet.
In Japan, there is a huge promotional campaign to get kids eat Whale Meat for Lunch!
So that's the "scientific purposes" that they're using to justify whaling?
why should that fail?
In general, the cheapest food is the least healthy. A lot of people (morons, if you ask me) feel that we already spend too much on schools. Therefore, corners are cut to save money. It generally doesn't go as far as putting a McDonald's in the school, but many lunchrooms are contracted out to companies like Aramark who are only interested in the bottom line. Selling chips and soda brings in the money. Selling fruit doesn't.
This is an absolutely horrible idea. You cannot make a legislator a criminal just by the course of their official duties. In fact, that's in the Constitution, Art I, Sec 6.
It is not the legislature's job to determine whether laws are constitutional. It is the legislature's job to pass laws that they feel will benefit the state.
In many cases, there is no way of knowing if a law is constitutional until SCOTUS rules on it. They don't accept pre-emptive cases and they don't issue opinions on potential legislation. In case you didn't notice, there is more than one way to interpret the Congressional powers outlined in the Constitution. You essentially want to make it illegal to have a difference in opinion. Ridiculous.
Wiki mentions that theory.
Yeah I had looked at that while composing my response. The thing is, this system would also give 'false negatives' if there were no vehicles seen at both locations. I guess that is the status quo, but it seems like a very low cost/benefit, with a very high big brother factor. After all, it's not every day that there's a sniper spree.
Those stations are bullshit. The NYC metro area is gigantic and there is traffic in every corner. It is not possible for those stations to report on every traffic incident in the 30 seconds that they get. Therefore, they tend to focus on bridges/tunnels, then the routes in/out of the city center, and then only the seriously major delays are mentioned for everything else.
I don't think that would have worked to catch the sniper. The shootings were spread over a very wide area. You have to hope that the killer uses highways or other major roads within a short time of the shootings, you'd have to deal with false positives, etc.
HERE's an idea, put stick on scan labels by all the veggies so once bagged they can just be weighed and scanned instead of having to key in the code by HAND
Some Wegmans stores have this setup. IMO, it's easier the "low tech" way. Working the scale is just as annoying as working the self-checkout line. And if your produce isn't in the list of codes (might be a special or something), forget about it.
Some of us, *gasp*, live within walking distance of the grocery store.
This post shows a critical misunderstanding of anti-trust law. Simply having a monopoly is completely legal. Spreading FUD is, in general, completely legal. It is improper use of a monopoly position which is illegal, and that's what got MS into trouble. They used their OS monopoly to wedge into the browser market (among other things).
They already sold you a copy of Windows, by making it difficult to use that alongside another OS, what are they expecting to acheive?
To force you to buy the next version of Windows, too.
Clearly their only motivation is to be anti-competitive, which is what one expects from a convicted monopolist.
That's just stupid.
Article 1 prohibits ex post facto laws.
Waco and Ruby Ridge were both disasters that could have been avoided. However, both Weaver and Koresh were accussed of committing crimes and would not allow the authorities to investigate or apprehend them. What would you like the government to do when this occurs? Just back down?
Would you be so sympathetic if these were black people in the ghetto?