1 insect, no. Mass extinction, yes. If you don't understand, pick up an book and educate yourself. ..I'm not being mean, or vindictive, but very sincere. What you just said is the equivalent of someone responding "Who cares if the average global temperature is a couple of degrees warmer...." in response to global warming trends.
But I'll pander you for a moment: imagine for a brief time that it's not bugs, but fish. A few thousand species of fish dieing off will strain the ocean ecosystem depleting populations of existing fis as well. That means less food which means more people starve. Starving people bad (if you say who cares on this one, we are in a completely different moral domain...good luck to you)
Actually it's "survival of the fit".
And whether something is natural or not has nothing to do with morality. After all, as I said before. I am a part of nature, if I kill something (by your reasoning) that is natural and so also justifiable.
BTW this is the only time in known history that a product of nature has caused such destruction.
Could you maybe mention a couple of unnecessary things? Would, perhaps, knowingly dumping carcinogens into a communities drinking water qualify? Or maybe raising cattle to be shipped to the West on 1000's of acres that could be used to grow corn to feed the starving people of that country? Probably not, since by your reasoning those kids were just not fit enough.
Could you explain exactly how the fact that you were born into relative privelege is any indication of your vast evolutionary superiority over the less fortunate?
You do realize that we are in the middle of one of the largest mass extinctions in the history of our world? Rivalled only by that of the Permian?
I mean really, how much of a cop out is it to blow it off as "man is part of nature, so this is natural"? You mine as well tack on ". ..so I'm going to get mine." on the end of it.
Even given that this is a natural event, there is one other HUGE difference. The others were absolutely, without a doubt, unequivacally unpreventable. Whereas the current is just as extremely preventable. Furthermore, a meteor cannot "decide" to stop wiping life from the face of the earth, be WE CAN.
Ok, let me spell it out for you: We have a choice This directly means that: We are responsible.
If we were to use your reasoning, every:
Every man is part of nature, therefore what he does is part of the natural state. Man is not responsible for the natural state. Consequently, no man is responsible for his actions destructive or otherwise.
Now go ahead and back pedal. "That's not what I'm saying. ..Of course, we're responsible, but. .." blah blah blah.
Nah, because it'd have the same number of delegates, except it'll just be Jeb sitting in a voting booth on a row boat in the middle of the ocean that determines the race.
Specs? amd proc speed, screen resolution, ramd type, 802.11g or 802.11b, hard drive....oh and brand of laptop of course. . . A quick jump over to Dell puts a machine like that at the 2400+ and a quick jot over to a couple of other OEM's is more of the same. Now I did find this AMD64 WXGA that meets your specs....but it's going for 1900+ as well and weighs 8lbs to the powerbooks 5 1/2. I also found the Compaq R3000Z as a AMD64 solution, it started at 800 but after added all the features that a powerbook comes with by default it quickly rose to 1700 and did not have the option for a card better than a 440 Go (not even close to the PB's 9700 Pro).
So, I'd be intrested where and who this super cheap feature full, sub 6lb laptop is coming from?
As I said before, you may not *need* all the features and quality of a apple laptop, but to compare it to a lesser product that is also cheaper is misleading. I can say I don't need a Mercedes and so purchase a econo car (saving a buck or two in the process), but pointing out that a wal-mart e-machine is cheaper than an iMac and than saying, "See I can get the same thing for 1/2 the price." Is just silly.
Oh and also out of curiosity, what are you going to be running that would benefit from 64 bit computing?
I recently bought a G5, I was a die hard "build it yourself" type having owned a custom built pc biz for a time and wasn't about to spend 2x the money for the same hardware and did quite a bit of comparison shopping.
I first compared the G5 to a Dell configured with comparable hardware. Where ever possible I even got exact parts. ..the Dell cost a few hundred dollars more.
I was surprised, but this left the self-built pc for comparison. I built a dual opteron set-up using parts from Newegg.com (very competitive prices). Again, I used parts that matched as much as possible the G5 specs (which means a dual proc board with pci-express, firewire, usb 2.0, Lian Li aluminum case, SATA, 160gb drive, gigabit ethernet, etc, etc). It was most certainly cheaper by $300+......but wait!! I'd forgotten software. Windows XP Pro, DVD authoring, and other comparable iLife apps, Quickbooks, Outlook, and so on (I didn't cheat either, OEM when I could get it). And the price difference became negligable.
Now you can argue that you were going to run Linux for free and that would be valid, however you would lose a lot of really great application support (which you may or may not need) and that is another can of worms. My point is, when compared to it's direct competitors OEM+MS or Self Built+MS the price difference is most definately *in the same ballpark* and in the case of OEM's even cheaper.
You can argue that you don't need a BMW and that econo car suits you just fine (sic the $400 dell package), but please don't make the mistake that the apple solution is in any way, form, or fashion 2x as much as comparable x86 hardware.
Don't take my word for it, go ahead and spec one out.....just remember the distinction between "The dell is cheaper because I don't need firewire, dvd, or gigabit ethernet" and "This dell has the same hardware as the Apple and is cheaper."
1. It's fairly cheap
2. It's well supported
3. There's lots of software for windows
4. There's a lot of hardware compatibility
5. It's good enough for most people, despite obvious flaws
I think you forgot a few:
6. It's bundled with damn near every OEM pc made.
7. OEM's are required to purchase a windows license for every cpu sold as a result of Microsoft extortion tactics.
Combine that with the fact that 1, 2, 3, and 4 are a direct consequence of my 6 and 7 and you may begin to understand the meaning of monoply. . . probably not though.
The whole "switch" thing is for basic users I guess. The rest of us aren't afraid to partition a hard drive.
I switched. I still use linux for my server, but moved to osx on my desktop and laptop. My question to you would be: Why reboot just to use a different app when you can run all of them on one OS?
Of course, you may have an application that can only be run for one OS, but this is rare. If not, than choosing the one OS that provides the choice of open source and the software options of the windows world isn't basic.....it's just plain smart.
I've read through a good bit of posts and it seems that many feel the "problem" with the release of their names is that it would be some sort of threat to the delegates.....But here's my question:
If these are the people who ultimately elect my President why do I not have a right to know exactly who they are? And why would my (the represented's) knowledge serve as a threat in any form or fashion?
The next thing you know, someone will be explaining why we shouldn't release the President's name to the public for security reasons.....
Can you be more specific on what specifically would disagree with you and the 9/11 commission?
All nuclear+Iraq claims a vast stretch of the imagination at best rather than the certainty presented by the admin.
Terrorist+Iraq the same.
Informants claiming WMD's were shoddy at best
"There is NO DOUBT that WMD's exist and we know where they are." You can read the commission report if you'd like, it's essentially just one big list of things such as this.
A lot of that is a matter of context...at the time, the Iraqi's and the Iranians were at war at the time.
It was a well known fact that the helicopters and poison gas given to Sadam were used to gas civilian populations including the Kurds. It is one of most significant human rights violations of our lifetimes. The Reagan administration (many members of whom are in Bush's admin including Rumsfeld) continued to supply and so tacitly condoned such violations. When it comes to gassing children there is no gray area, my friend.
but the alternative is to let the enemy do the same or worse things unhindered
If you must become the enemy to beat the enemy, he's already won.
I am not in favor of that, but then barring more taxes, how do you raise that and not add even more to the deficit which I'm sure everyone loves to point out.
If you want to fight a war, you pay the soldiers. You should gladly accept a tax to accomplish this.....or oh wait, maybe you can just NOT give a tax break to the rich and use those funds....yeah, that's the ticket!
The shere size of such a contract can limit the number of business capable of doing such work for the military.
Limit perhaps, eliminate all but one....doubtful. Eliminate all but the company of the VP, curious. Eliminate to the point where bids are not even accepted....fraud.
but then the question is, how are you sure these drugs perform the same as the name brands which have gone through riggour testing to avoid possible law suites.
Not all generics are produced in some back cabin of a 3rd world country. Many are produced right in the good 'ole US of A. And how can you tell? It's called chemistry, yep you got it, you can call benzodiazapam Valium, but it's still the same thing. In fact, I would hope the gov would take a random sampling of any large order (generic or otherwise) to ensure that they are receiving at least the minimum standards.
As indicated above, to get the economy moving you have to spend money. . ..
Rhetoric. "To win the game, you have to play hard." and all that jive. I'm not an economist, I'm betting you aren't either. However, I can look at the president's fiscal policy and tell that keeping america's head above water was not its primary interest: refer to above points->tax breaks for rich, anti-competitive policies, and buying less of the same product for more. That's just bad business.
After 17 UN resolutions...still no one succeeded in getting anything accomplished in Iraq.
Eliminated WMD's from Iraq.
crippled Iraq Economy.
Eliminated Iraq as a threat to the entire world (refer to 9-11 commision findings again)
Not really sure what else you were looking for.
The case could be made their is a overlap between administrations where by what happened during the second was a result of actions during the previous or earlier administration.
Well as I pointed out earlier, the 9-11 commission found the Bush admin to be incompetant in several areas. They also uncovered several instances where the admin was previously warned of exactly the sort of attack that occured but dropped the ball.
Do you include Fox in that or are only left leaning biased new coverage allowed to be included in that list.
Actually I don't consider FOX much of a news station at all, more along the lines of a tv talk show, like Geraldo....oh wait.
Sorry, but your very wrong. I would name all the protocols that ARE supported, but it would be easier to name ones that aren't......I can't think of any. Can you?
IBM has several models of Linux certified laptops and if you've ever used an IBM laptop you know their of the highest quality.
There are other options too for pre-installed laptops with full customer application support:
Element Computers
They are a linux only vendor and were favorably reviewed. They've been featured on slasdot a couple of times.
What you want is out there, your just not going to get it from the Dell+Gateway+HP+Apple world.......and why should you? They're not linux vendors. Remember a purchase from them increases demand for a Windows/Apple operating system, a purchase from a linux retailer increases support for Linux OS....no matter what you choose to install afterwards.:)
Kerry voted to go to Iraqi. it can't be said it's alright for Kerry to say he was mislead and not give the president the same creedance.
I and the 9-11 commission would disagree....
I do agree that as far as ultimate goals for the Iraq war Bush and Kerry's positions are quite similar with the main impetus from Kerry being "I can do better." Consequently, I would point out the errors in judgement as found by the commission as well as current members of the administration's support of Sadam Hussein in the past (Ah Hem, Rumsfeld, chemical weapons, gassing of the Kurds and Iranian's anyone) and lack of ability to significantly cripple Osama's network in defense of this assumption.
Than I would point out Bush's failure in domestic areas such as economy, human rights, benefits cuts to soldiers, tax breaks for the rich, quelching of the very principle of capitalism our country's economy is based on with no bid/uncontested contracts awarded to Haliburton, corporate welfare thinly veiled as an AID's relief package by writing in that no drugs can be generic, largest deficit ever seen in the history of the modern world, alienation of allies through failed diplomacy, worst security record of any president in our country's history allowing (you can argue that no one could have done better, but the only certaintity is that the Bush admin. didn't do good enough).
*NOTE* you can google for any one of these with any common news network like cnn, cbs, abc, etc to 'read all about it'.
The only allies that are ever going to be there are already there.
That may be the status quo, but whether that will change is completely dependant upon the actual and perceived integrity of our commander in cheif and his ability and willingness to bring other nations to the negotiation table. Bush has neither of these qualities.
We're already trying to do that already. No difference in administration policy, there.
Trying is the operative word here. It was Kerry's (and others) opinion that he is failing horribly at this endeavor. To the point: There have been more deaths with each passing month than the month before since the declaration to the end of combat.
WTH? What is an enabler? That's just some vague psycho-babble buzzword . ..
This is more of a snipe than any sort of legitimate retort. So I'll rephrase to give you another chance: My key point was that the general world opinion is that we are occupiers not rescuers. This view is mainly due to Bush's cowboy, fuck the world, go for broke antics and non-cooperation as well as the appointment of a prime minister that the iraqi people view as a CIA Stooge.
Now for the point by point: - Give them free elections?
Rumsfeld doesn't seem to think the free elections goal will be reached on time. I'm curious which portions onf the country will constitute Rumsfeld's acceptable toll of 25% disenfranchised voters. . . maybe the war torn Shiite areas? Not quite a 'check' here.
- Replenish their police force? Try again: The challenges to the United States in training and deploying that many officers are considerable, officials acknowledge. Currently, about 82,051 Iraqi police officers are on the payroll, but only 32,880 have received training under U.S. guidance, according to figures provided by Capt. Steven Alvarez, an Army officer working with the Iraqi Interior Ministry. Of that number, Congress was told last week that only 8,200 had received the eight-week training; the rest got a more basic course for three weeks or less.
- Restore electricity, sanitation, and medical services?
And that's the bell for class so you can look up the rest
You must go to sleep early, not once during the entire debate did Kerry say he would "pull out of Iraq ASAP." In fact he was very clear about his intended Iraq policy:
Involve a coalition of all nations to share in the rebuilding of Iraq in order to lighten the burden on American soldiers and economy.
Ensure that the Iraqi forces had been adequately trained to perform necessary police actions.
And take all means necessary to foster the view that America is not an occupier, but an enabler.
I found this refreshing to Bush's repetative and very non-specific "We're going to win!" over and over with no real substance as far as a clear plan and intelligent resolve. . .
First they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me -
And there was no-one left
To speak out for me.
Pastor Niemöller, 1938
It was not lack of intelligence that led to the success of the 9-11 attacks, but lack of action. Prior knowledge of eminent attack was available and passed through the necessary hands, but ignored. It was also determined that an inadequate amount of time was spent by the administrations security department on issues of terrorism. (no I'm not screaming conspiracy, but incomptence). Don't believe me? Have fun: 9-11 Commission
Of course, I understand it's much easier to swallow party line sound bites whole than actually educate yourself about the state of our nation.
I'd like to second the grandparent's post. ..Especially for your server. PPC's have a much lower clock speed and power consumption than a similarly fast PC. My server is a 300mhz G3 running linux and it's quite as can be, even quiter than a 450mhz amd/pentium chip and quit a bit faster.
There can be no doubt that the businesses who chose to switch had incompetent support staff when it came to linux. However, they appear to be adequately comptetent when it comes to administering a MS solution. For this reason, in the end they made the right choice. I don't see how this would galvanize or destroy peaceful co-existence. It's simply the truth.
Actually, the open office linest function outputs the data to a series of cells, which you than must plot. I know because I read the docs and fiddled with it. Getting the produced data to plot correctly was irritating. In MS, (haven't used it in a while) you just check a box in the graph set up and presto, it's plotted. You don't even have to read the docs.
Excel, graphing. I'm a linux user and for chem. labs we had to plot data sets for our weekly lab reports. Using Excel this was a trivial task which required absolutely no knowledge of the inner workings of the spreadsheet to produce really nice looking reports.
In Linux I tried Gnumeric (nice and coming along fast, but still not even up to par) and OpenOffice (not even close).
And no, it had nothing to do with "being familar with the Excel way". I'd never needed to perform spreadsheet tasks before...it took me quite a while of reading docs to figure out how to even do a linear regression that looked nice in the GNU alternatives whereas it's a matter of 2 clicks of the mouse in Excel.
Your preaching to the choir when it comes to me and open source, but MS has the best office suite around............period.
If you received the "We do not plan on supporting (Mozilla|OSx) or (Firefox|Linux) in the near future" message be sure to take the couple of minutes to submit feedback so the company is aware of the business they lost.
Mine went like this:
I am a linux and osx user. You just lost my business.
Slashdot Mirror
But I'll pander you for a moment: imagine for a brief time that it's not bugs, but fish. A few thousand species of fish dieing off will strain the ocean ecosystem depleting populations of existing fis as well. That means less food which means more people starve. Starving people bad (if you say who cares on this one, we are in a completely different moral domain...good luck to you)
And whether something is natural or not has nothing to do with morality. After all, as I said before. I am a part of nature, if I kill something (by your reasoning) that is natural and so also justifiable.
BTW this is the only time in known history that a product of nature has caused such destruction.
Could you maybe mention a couple of unnecessary things? Would, perhaps, knowingly dumping carcinogens into a communities drinking water qualify? Or maybe raising cattle to be shipped to the West on 1000's of acres that could be used to grow corn to feed the starving people of that country? Probably not, since by your reasoning those kids were just not fit enough.
Could you explain exactly how the fact that you were born into relative privelege is any indication of your vast evolutionary superiority over the less fortunate?
You do realize that we are in the middle of one of the largest mass extinctions in the history of our world? Rivalled only by that of the Permian?
I mean really, how much of a cop out is it to blow it off as "man is part of nature, so this is natural"? You mine as well tack on ". . .so I'm going to get mine." on the end of it.
Even given that this is a natural event, there is one other HUGE difference. The others were absolutely, without a doubt, unequivacally unpreventable. Whereas the current is just as extremely preventable. Furthermore, a meteor cannot "decide" to stop wiping life from the face of the earth, be WE CAN.
Ok, let me spell it out for you: We have a choice This directly means that: We are responsible.
If we were to use your reasoning, every:
Every man is part of nature, therefore what he does is part of the natural state. Man is not responsible for the natural state. Consequently, no man is responsible for his actions destructive or otherwise.
Now go ahead and back pedal. "That's not what I'm saying. . .Of course, we're responsible, but. . ." blah blah blah.
*SMACK* Bad, faulty logic, bad!!
Nah, because it'd have the same number of delegates, except it'll just be Jeb sitting in a voting booth on a row boat in the middle of the ocean that determines the race.
So, I'd be intrested where and who this super cheap feature full, sub 6lb laptop is coming from?
As I said before, you may not *need* all the features and quality of a apple laptop, but to compare it to a lesser product that is also cheaper is misleading. I can say I don't need a Mercedes and so purchase a econo car (saving a buck or two in the process), but pointing out that a wal-mart e-machine is cheaper than an iMac and than saying, "See I can get the same thing for 1/2 the price." Is just silly.
Oh and also out of curiosity, what are you going to be running that would benefit from 64 bit computing?
I recently bought a G5, I was a die hard "build it yourself" type having owned a custom built pc biz for a time and wasn't about to spend 2x the money for the same hardware and did quite a bit of comparison shopping.
I first compared the G5 to a Dell configured with comparable hardware. Where ever possible I even got exact parts. . .the Dell cost a few hundred dollars more.
I was surprised, but this left the self-built pc for comparison. I built a dual opteron set-up using parts from Newegg.com (very competitive prices). Again, I used parts that matched as much as possible the G5 specs (which means a dual proc board with pci-express, firewire, usb 2.0, Lian Li aluminum case, SATA, 160gb drive, gigabit ethernet, etc, etc). It was most certainly cheaper by $300+......but wait!! I'd forgotten software. Windows XP Pro, DVD authoring, and other comparable iLife apps, Quickbooks, Outlook, and so on (I didn't cheat either, OEM when I could get it). And the price difference became negligable.
Now you can argue that you were going to run Linux for free and that would be valid, however you would lose a lot of really great application support (which you may or may not need) and that is another can of worms. My point is, when compared to it's direct competitors OEM+MS or Self Built+MS the price difference is most definately *in the same ballpark* and in the case of OEM's even cheaper.
You can argue that you don't need a BMW and that econo car suits you just fine (sic the $400 dell package), but please don't make the mistake that the apple solution is in any way, form, or fashion 2x as much as comparable x86 hardware.
Don't take my word for it, go ahead and spec one out.....just remember the distinction between "The dell is cheaper because I don't need firewire, dvd, or gigabit ethernet" and "This dell has the same hardware as the Apple and is cheaper."
2. It's well supported
3. There's lots of software for windows
4. There's a lot of hardware compatibility
5. It's good enough for most people, despite obvious flaws
I think you forgot a few:
6. It's bundled with damn near every OEM pc made.
7. OEM's are required to purchase a windows license for every cpu sold as a result of Microsoft extortion tactics.
Combine that with the fact that 1, 2, 3, and 4 are a direct consequence of my 6 and 7 and you may begin to understand the meaning of monoply. . . probably not though.
I switched. I still use linux for my server, but moved to osx on my desktop and laptop. My question to you would be: Why reboot just to use a different app when you can run all of them on one OS?
Of course, you may have an application that can only be run for one OS, but this is rare. If not, than choosing the one OS that provides the choice of open source and the software options of the windows world isn't basic.....it's just plain smart.
The electorate represents the public, therefore the public should have a right to know who they are.
If these are the people who ultimately elect my President why do I not have a right to know exactly who they are? And why would my (the represented's) knowledge serve as a threat in any form or fashion?
The next thing you know, someone will be explaining why we shouldn't release the President's name to the public for security reasons.....
cheers
A lot of that is a matter of context...at the time, the Iraqi's and the Iranians were at war at the time.
It was a well known fact that the helicopters and poison gas given to Sadam were used to gas civilian populations including the Kurds. It is one of most significant human rights violations of our lifetimes. The Reagan administration (many members of whom are in Bush's admin including Rumsfeld) continued to supply and so tacitly condoned such violations. When it comes to gassing children there is no gray area, my friend.
but the alternative is to let the enemy do the same or worse things unhindered If you must become the enemy to beat the enemy, he's already won.
I am not in favor of that, but then barring more taxes, how do you raise that and not add even more to the deficit which I'm sure everyone loves to point out.
If you want to fight a war, you pay the soldiers. You should gladly accept a tax to accomplish this.....or oh wait, maybe you can just NOT give a tax break to the rich and use those funds....yeah, that's the ticket!
The shere size of such a contract can limit the number of business capable of doing such work for the military.
Limit perhaps, eliminate all but one....doubtful. Eliminate all but the company of the VP, curious. Eliminate to the point where bids are not even accepted....fraud.
but then the question is, how are you sure these drugs perform the same as the name brands which have gone through riggour testing to avoid possible law suites.
Not all generics are produced in some back cabin of a 3rd world country. Many are produced right in the good 'ole US of A. And how can you tell? It's called chemistry, yep you got it, you can call benzodiazapam Valium, but it's still the same thing. In fact, I would hope the gov would take a random sampling of any large order (generic or otherwise) to ensure that they are receiving at least the minimum standards.
As indicated above, to get the economy moving you have to spend money. . . .
Rhetoric. "To win the game, you have to play hard." and all that jive. I'm not an economist, I'm betting you aren't either. However, I can look at the president's fiscal policy and tell that keeping america's head above water was not its primary interest: refer to above points->tax breaks for rich, anti-competitive policies, and buying less of the same product for more. That's just bad business.
After 17 UN resolutions...still no one succeeded in getting anything accomplished in Iraq.
- Eliminated WMD's from Iraq.
- crippled Iraq Economy.
- Eliminated Iraq as a threat to the entire world (refer to 9-11 commision findings again)
Not really sure what else you were looking for.The case could be made their is a overlap between administrations where by what happened during the second was a result of actions during the previous or earlier administration.
Well as I pointed out earlier, the 9-11 commission found the Bush admin to be incompetant in several areas. They also uncovered several instances where the admin was previously warned of exactly the sort of attack that occured but dropped the ball.
Do you include Fox in that or are only left leaning biased new coverage allowed to be included in that list.
Actually I don't consider FOX much of a news station at all, more along the lines of a tv talk show, like Geraldo....oh wait.
*NOTE: and yes I mean natively, not through wine.
There are other options too for pre-installed laptops with full customer application support: Element Computers
They are a linux only vendor and were favorably reviewed. They've been featured on slasdot a couple of times.
What you want is out there, your just not going to get it from the Dell+Gateway+HP+Apple world.......and why should you? They're not linux vendors. Remember a purchase from them increases demand for a Windows/Apple operating system, a purchase from a linux retailer increases support for Linux OS....no matter what you choose to install afterwards. :)
Kerry voted to go to Iraqi. it can't be said it's alright for Kerry to say he was mislead and not give the president the same creedance.
I and the 9-11 commission would disagree....
I do agree that as far as ultimate goals for the Iraq war Bush and Kerry's positions are quite similar with the main impetus from Kerry being "I can do better." Consequently, I would point out the errors in judgement as found by the commission as well as current members of the administration's support of Sadam Hussein in the past (Ah Hem, Rumsfeld, chemical weapons, gassing of the Kurds and Iranian's anyone) and lack of ability to significantly cripple Osama's network in defense of this assumption.Than I would point out Bush's failure in domestic areas such as economy, human rights, benefits cuts to soldiers, tax breaks for the rich, quelching of the very principle of capitalism our country's economy is based on with no bid/uncontested contracts awarded to Haliburton, corporate welfare thinly veiled as an AID's relief package by writing in that no drugs can be generic, largest deficit ever seen in the history of the modern world, alienation of allies through failed diplomacy, worst security record of any president in our country's history allowing (you can argue that no one could have done better, but the only certaintity is that the Bush admin. didn't do good enough).
*NOTE* you can google for any one of these with any common news network like cnn, cbs, abc, etc to 'read all about it'.
The only allies that are ever going to be there are already there.
That may be the status quo, but whether that will change is completely dependant upon the actual and perceived integrity of our commander in cheif and his ability and willingness to bring other nations to the negotiation table. Bush has neither of these qualities.
We're already trying to do that already. No difference in administration policy, there.
Trying is the operative word here. It was Kerry's (and others) opinion that he is failing horribly at this endeavor. To the point: There have been more deaths with each passing month than the month before since the declaration to the end of combat.
WTH? What is an enabler? That's just some vague psycho-babble buzzword . . .
This is more of a snipe than any sort of legitimate retort. So I'll rephrase to give you another chance: My key point was that the general world opinion is that we are occupiers not rescuers. This view is mainly due to Bush's cowboy, fuck the world, go for broke antics and non-cooperation as well as the appointment of a prime minister that the iraqi people view as a CIA Stooge.
Now for the point by point:
- Give them free elections?
Rumsfeld doesn't seem to think the free elections goal will be reached on time. I'm curious which portions onf the country will constitute Rumsfeld's acceptable toll of 25% disenfranchised voters. . . maybe the war torn Shiite areas? Not quite a 'check' here.
- Replenish their police force?
Try again: The challenges to the United States in training and deploying that many officers are considerable, officials acknowledge. Currently, about 82,051 Iraqi police officers are on the payroll, but only 32,880 have received training under U.S. guidance, according to figures provided by Capt. Steven Alvarez, an Army officer working with the Iraqi Interior Ministry. Of that number, Congress was told last week that only 8,200 had received the eight-week training; the rest got a more basic course for three weeks or less.
- Restore electricity, sanitation, and medical services?
And that's the bell for class so you can look up the rest
cheersI found this refreshing to Bush's repetative and very non-specific "We're going to win!" over and over with no real substance as far as a clear plan and intelligent resolve. . .
First they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out -
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me -
And there was no-one left
To speak out for me.
Pastor Niemöller, 1938
It was not lack of intelligence that led to the success of the 9-11 attacks, but lack of action. Prior knowledge of eminent attack was available and passed through the necessary hands, but ignored. It was also determined that an inadequate amount of time was spent by the administrations security department on issues of terrorism. (no I'm not screaming conspiracy, but incomptence). Don't believe me? Have fun: 9-11 Commission
Of course, I understand it's much easier to swallow party line sound bites whole than actually educate yourself about the state of our nation.
I'd like to second the grandparent's post. . .Especially for your server. PPC's have a much lower clock speed and power consumption than a similarly fast PC. My server is a 300mhz G3 running linux and it's quite as can be, even quiter than a 450mhz amd/pentium chip and quit a bit faster.
There can be no doubt that the businesses who chose to switch had incompetent support staff when it came to linux. However, they appear to be adequately comptetent when it comes to administering a MS solution. For this reason, in the end they made the right choice. I don't see how this would galvanize or destroy peaceful co-existence. It's simply the truth.
At my university, XP, VS .NET, and Office are distributed free and legal by MS.
Actually, the open office linest function outputs the data to a series of cells, which you than must plot. I know because I read the docs and fiddled with it. Getting the produced data to plot correctly was irritating. In MS, (haven't used it in a while) you just check a box in the graph set up and presto, it's plotted. You don't even have to read the docs.
In Linux I tried Gnumeric (nice and coming along fast, but still not even up to par) and OpenOffice (not even close).
And no, it had nothing to do with "being familar with the Excel way". I'd never needed to perform spreadsheet tasks before...it took me quite a while of reading docs to figure out how to even do a linear regression that looked nice in the GNU alternatives whereas it's a matter of 2 clicks of the mouse in Excel.
Your preaching to the choir when it comes to me and open source, but MS has the best office suite around............period.
Mine went like this:
You just lost my business.
Hehe, "discovering a priori things we weren't aware of" is somewhat of an oxymoron: Websters: a priori