A theocracy is one where the leaders claim to represent the will of God, and where only those approved of by the official priest class are allowed to participate in governance.
And yes, that is inherently bad, since members of other religions (and "non-believers") are excluded and have no voice.
United States support for Iraq during the Iran - Iraq War, against post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars' worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, Special Operations training, and direct involvement in warfare against Iran.
Support from the U.S. for Iraq was not a secret and was frequently discussed in open session of the Senate and House of Representatives. On June 9, 1992, Ted Koppel reported on ABC's Nightline,that the "Reagan/Bush administrations permitted - and frequently encouraged - the flow of money, agricultural credits, dual-use technology, chemicals, and weapons to Iraq."
In your reference, Jeff Weintraub talks about US-Iraq relations before the fall of the Soviet Union, but that is of little relevance to the invasion of 2003.
Clearly you have to be pretty badly repressed, far worse than the average UK citizen is, before you are willing to murder other people and possibly die doing so.
Unless you really believe that the moment you blow yourself up, you will be instantly transported to an oasis with 77 Playboy bunnies.
Would you want the police or security services to be able to listen in on the phone calls, or read the emails, of a gang that had kidnapped one of your loved ones and threatened to mail you various body parts each day until you paid the ranson?
It's called a warrant and has nothing to do with the mass trolling of everyone's phone and internet communications.
In all seriousness, the answer to that question is consciousness.
That's like saying "you can't explain this, therefore God did it". There is no answer to the question, and may never be. It may not even be a meaningful question.
I always want to strangle folks that don't want to build new plants because old plants are "dangerous" (which they're not, they're much safer than even solar power).
What they are is expensive. Horrendously expensive.
So expensive that private investors won't go near them, particularly since the payback time is measured in decades.
And that is only when the taxpayer is willing to underwrite them. No private insurance company would touch a nuke project.
Except that the Soviets were bankrupted by trying to compete with the U.S. in military expenditures, something that wasn't going to happen with the U.S.military budget under Reagan (good for him). To really see what a socialized system looks like today, look to Finland, Norway or Germany - all countries with powerful economies and advanced social welfare.
To qualify for a skilled labor job, you need training. Expensive training. Not only expensive in terms of tuition, but in terms of supporting your family while you are receiving the training.
For the senate to compromise with the Tea Party is like you having to compromise with someone that is threatening to shoot you.
Tea Party: I want to shoot you in the head, OK?
You:No.
Tea Party: OK, let's compromise. How about if I just shoot you in the stomach?
You:No.
Tea Party:Be reasonable! Then just let me shoot you in the hand. This is my final offer.
You:No.
Tea Party: So you won't negotiate. So, I'll just put up roadblocks everywhere so nothing can get though. And it's all your fault!
Why is Slashdot publishing legal advice given by someone with a master's degree in mathematics that contradicts the advice given by a law professor?
One reason: because he is a buddy of samzenpus.
The real question is : why does samzenpus think that anyone would give a flying fuck what this bozo Haselton thinks about anything?
How low can/. sink?
You're pursuing this argument in a way that is typical in the humanities and social sciences, namely by deciding on the conclusion you want ("anyone can be a scientist") beforehand, and then justifying your conclusion by warping the definition of "scientist" to mean "anyone who is interested in science". That is not what the word means.
The term "scientist" as it is used in common English, and certainly as it pertains to Einstein, refers to a professional researcher who discovers and publishes new research.
And very few people have the aptitude set needed for that.
Your over-emphasis on intelligence is elitism; It's suggesting that if you can't be "smart enough", you shouldn't be in science.
Unfortunately, the world is divided into the elite and the non-elite when it comes to mastering technically complex information, whether you like it or not. Specifically, an aptitude for math is an absolute requirement in the physical sciences. Without it, you may dabble in science, but will never be a significant contributor to it.
Germany, Denmark and Finland have functional safety nets with relatively high taxes, while at the same time maintaining economies that make that of the U.S. look like a sad joke.
On the other hand, they don't have expensive spy technology used to spy on their own people, or multi-billion dollar fighter planes that don't work. Hell, they can't even afford to run two middle eastern wars without getting trillions of dollars in debt to China!
Slashdot Mirror
What was your point, exactly?
A theocracy is one where the leaders claim to represent the will of God, and where only those approved of by the official priest class are allowed to participate in governance.
And yes, that is inherently bad, since members of other religions (and "non-believers") are excluded and have no voice.
In your reference, Jeff Weintraub talks about US-Iraq relations before the fall of the Soviet Union, but that is of little relevance to the invasion of 2003.
Unless you really believe that the moment you blow yourself up,
you will be instantly transported to an oasis with 77 Playboy bunnies.
It's called a warrant and has nothing to do with the mass trolling of everyone's phone and internet communications.
That's like saying "you can't explain this, therefore God did it".
There is no answer to the question, and may never be. It may not even be a meaningful question.
Does the interaction involve the transfer or absorption of energy (photons)?
If so => collapse.
if not =>no collapse.
It's pining for the fjords.
Well then, that would apply to the millions of kids (myself included) who have had great fun zapping ants with a magnifying glass in the summer.
Insect don't have a consciousness as we understand it, so "torturing" them is not a realistic concept.
You were too dense to get his obviously satiric post, and you're calling him an asshole?
What they are is expensive. Horrendously expensive.
So expensive that private investors won't go near them, particularly since the payback time is measured in decades.
And that is only when the taxpayer is willing to underwrite them.
No private insurance company would touch a nuke project.
Except that the Soviets were bankrupted by trying to compete with the U.S. in military expenditures,
something that wasn't going to happen with the U.S.military budget under Reagan (good for him).
To really see what a socialized system looks like today, look to Finland, Norway or Germany -
all countries with powerful economies and advanced social welfare.
And because they know that if they complain, they can be sent right back to Elbonia.
To qualify for a skilled labor job, you need training. Expensive training.
Not only expensive in terms of tuition, but in terms of supporting your family while you are receiving the training.
Unless the Tea Party forces another shutdown over it. And they will.
For the senate to compromise with the Tea Party is like you having to compromise with someone that is threatening to shoot you.
Tea Party: I want to shoot you in the head, OK?
You:No.
Tea Party: OK, let's compromise. How about if I just shoot you in the stomach?
You:No.
Tea Party:Be reasonable! Then just let me shoot you in the hand. This is my final offer.
You:No.
Tea Party: So you won't negotiate. So, I'll just put up roadblocks everywhere so nothing can get though. And it's all your fault!
One reason: because he is a buddy of samzenpus.
/. sink?
The real question is : why does samzenpus think that anyone would give a flying fuck what this bozo Haselton thinks about anything?
How low can
This already exists. You just need $20 million to throw around.
All of which are available in a ASUS tablet, at a much lower price.
That's what MS believes. I don't think it works anymore.
It is. - OCTAL
You're pursuing this argument in a way that is typical in the humanities and social sciences, namely by deciding on the conclusion you want
("anyone can be a scientist") beforehand, and then justifying your conclusion by warping the definition of "scientist" to mean "anyone who is interested in science".
That is not what the word means.
The term "scientist" as it is used in common English, and certainly as it pertains to Einstein,
refers to a professional researcher who discovers and publishes new research.
And very few people have the aptitude set needed for that.
Unfortunately, the world is divided into the elite and the non-elite when it comes to mastering technically complex information, whether you like it or not.
Specifically, an aptitude for math is an absolute requirement in the physical sciences.
Without it, you may dabble in science, but will never be a significant contributor to it.
Especially at night.
Germany, Denmark and Finland have functional safety nets with relatively high taxes, while at the same time maintaining economies that make that of the U.S. look like a sad joke.
On the other hand, they don't have expensive spy technology used to spy on their own people, or multi-billion dollar fighter planes that don't work.
Hell, they can't even afford to run two middle eastern wars without getting trillions of dollars in debt to China!
Americans are so much better off.