Because they did not have the ability to do so. If Iraq had been able to strike the United States, they certainly would have done so in the 10 years between wars. As stated, Saddam was an incredibly secular leader. He only really cared about staying rich and surviving unharassed. He would not have jeopardized it to attack the US.
You missed my point. The Iraq war wasn't needed to prevent a conventional attack on America by the Saddam's government but there are many ways that it could have prevented attacks on the US. Keeping the terrorists busy, showing the liberals middle-east that the US is serious about liberisation of the middle east. In the long term, stability in the middle east will mean less attacks. In the short term, the terrorists are busy in Iraq.
See above. bin Laden did do that in Afghanistan, but he could just as easily be doing it now from Chechnya, Pakistan, or wherever the hell he is. The Taliban wasn't really involved in any manner other than getting paid to look the other way.
You can't seriously believe that do you? The Taliban have a fundamentalist islamic vision and so does bin laden. I really don't see how you can think they were just "paid" to look the other way.
Yes, WE are learning their tactics. They like to ambush us in the hills. Couldn't we have learned that from any insurgency or guerilla operations? Make a case study out of what happened to the Soviets in the 80s in Afghanistan. Same effect. All we're learning is that they're very hard to root out and they like to shoot at us. On the other hand, they are learning how we operate, what equipment we use, what tactics we use, when we use airpower, and what we have at our disposal.
The soviet situation was different. Firstly, they didn't succeed in installing a government and getting 9 out of 10 eligible votes to vote and secondly they didn't have another superpower (america) helping the other side.
Yes, we're seeding liberty all right. We are doing good things in Afghanistan, no doubt. Women have a lot more rights, and there is more infrastructure (though a lot of that is the Caspian Oil Pipeline). Unfortunately, the last estimates I heard from my friends in the military (who were deployed there) were that we maintained a functional control zone of 100m around Kabul. The rest is provisional warlords and druglords.
I agree that it isn't ideal but good things take time. The situation under the taliban wasn't much better (warlords, drug lords etc). The taliban had "methods" for dealing with drugs which "liberal" governments wouldn't agree with.
Anyway, I just can't understand people who run around claming that afghanistan has been destroyed by the US and that they're worse off. I really can't.
Maybe you have missed the fact that the US invaded the country, searched it for month and found absolutly no evidance of any plans to attack to US?
I didn't mean preventing attacks from Saddam himself. Other attacks by extremists could possibility (I don't know for sure) have been avoided because they are now busy in Iraq and in the long term, middle-east stability and liberisation will lead to less tolerance for terror.
I'm sure Saddamn would have loved to take a crack at us, if he could, but he was an extremely secular leader (not associated with the religious nutjobs in Al-Qaeda) who would not have jeopardized his situation through a terrorist attack on the US. SCUDs didn't have nearly the range to hit the US. They could barely hit Israel.
And he funded suicided bombers in Israel.
Afghanistan is a warzone with no infrastructure (we destroyed it all) largely controlled by regional warlords.
Are you retarded or what? There is *MORE* infrastructure in Afghanistan than there were before the recent war. Afghanistan has been fucked by decades of war and now they are finally on the path to prospoerity. Stop reading the NY times.
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq had the navy or airpower to attack the US.
Yeah, like that's how they would choose to attack the US. Has nothing to do with them funding and homing the terrorists.
Period. All we're doing is giving foreign nationals (most of the terrorists in either country are from Saudi, Pakistan, and other countries) experience fighting that they would have gotten in Chechnya before so they can hit us harder next time once they know our tactics.
Or maybe the YOU are learning their tactics? I mean, if they attack the US they aren't going to be attacking in a conventional way and therefore aren't going to be confronted by an ARMY force are they?
On the other hand, the military are understanding how the extremists work and at the same time are seeding liberty in countries which could certainly benefit from it. Look at Afghanistan for an example. They've made amazing progress in such a short amount of time and many countries (and the UN) are ensuring success. Admittedly Iraq is not as successful (yet).
Voting in the united states for example could be one vote per square mile and everyone currently living in that square mile can hash it out among themselves.
Kyoto is about POLLUTION which is directly related to land mass. Democractic government is not. Anyway, in many democracies, out of compromise, you do see proportional representation based on land mass (electorates).
Or perhaps food supplies, 210 meals a day per square mile, that should destroy the cities pronto. Sorry, I'm not buying it.
The planet belongs to everyone and there is no reason why one individual should have less right to screw it up for their own benefit than any other person.
Exactly my point. Why should China get away with pollution because they have an irresponsibly large population? They should not be punished for having so many children but they must also not be rewarded for being irresponsible as that would be hugely unfair to more responsible countries. So the fair thing to do would to NOT exempt china or india simply because they *choose* to have lots of children.
Anyway, goto beijing and tell me how often you see the sun.
So the chinese have *lots* of children compared to the more responsible people in the US so they should be given an economical advantage advantage?
Sheesh. It should be based on land mass and NOT population.
I ask you to go to a major chinese city and tell me if you can even see the sun through the smog and then compare that to a "bad" US city like LA.
Any idiot knows that China is polluting the world more than the US. The government simply isn't accountable to anyone (not their own people and not to their socialist buddies at the UN).
Yes. One of the things about Maxthon is that you can simple higlight any text on the page and do a small "drag and drop" to part of the page and it'll open up a new tab with the google search results for the text you highlighted and dragged.
I haven't found any firefox plugin that can do that.
If, as you said, they re-implemented the API using POSIX, then it's NOT a wrapper of Windows calls, is it?
What I meant is that they had to implement Win32 APIs to get Rotor working on BSD..NET isn't a raw wrapper of Win32 calls but it has a lot of Win32-isms in it. Mono for example implemented the whole windows handle/threading/io subsystem ontop of POSIX kindda like rotor.
Yep... they must have rewritten all of Windows and ported it to 4 other platforms. I knew they were good, but not that good!
Well actually if you examine the code for Rotor they did reimplement a lot of Win32 APIs using POSIX calls.
And also your comments are irrelevant cause there's no way in hell NASA World Wind would actually work on Mono or Rotor/BSD. Why? Cause it uses Win32 dependent APIs (DirectX, SWF, etc).
That would mean generating the valuable cells without using a human egg, and without creating a human embryo, which some people, including President George W. Bush, find objectionable and speaking of which, the grieving mother of a fallen soldier, Cindy Sheehan, who finds Bush just as objectionable is on her way back to the president's crawford ranch.
I wouldn't be offended but I would find it rather odd and even creepy to see videos of some dead guy who once enjoyed living play back a few meters from his buried decomposing corpse.
I guess death gets to me and I'm not religious or superstitious.
Maybe fading slideshows of photos would be a bit better. A picture has often has the ability to capture and convey memories in a way video can not.
Hell, why not just have a physical mechanical device that slides photos around? Would be cheaper and much clearer than any crappy LCD.
What's important is that these drives are single platter 1.8" drives. 40GB and 60GB 1.8" drives have been around for a while but they're double platter and are about 9mm high.
These drives would be great upgrades to tablets like the NEC Litepad.
You're out of touch with reality. You're either a hopeless romantic or you're just simply deluded about human behavior: the good, the bad, and the ugly.
Nah, he's just a card carrying member of the hate America first club.
Since it's going to screw up your golden age regardless of what's causing it, why aren't you interested in doing whatever is possible to reverse it?
Highly predictable response.
If we aren't causing it, then it is possible that there is no way we can stop it. For example, can we stop a volcano from erupting? Even going as far as shutting down all industry may serve to do very little to slow down global warming if, like some believe, it is caused by the heating of the sea (which liberates CO2 into the atmosphere).
If all this is true (I'm not saying whether it is or not -- we don't know), then it would be in our best interests to keep speeding along with our industries so that we can grow the economy and develop techonology that could in the future either fix the problem on earth (domes?:)) or, alternatively, give is respite on another planet until earth falls back into a more stable part of its cycle.
Slashdot Mirror
Because they did not have the ability to do so. If Iraq had been able to strike the United States, they certainly would have done so in the 10 years between wars. As stated, Saddam was an incredibly secular leader. He only really cared about staying rich and surviving unharassed. He would not have jeopardized it to attack the US.
You missed my point. The Iraq war wasn't needed to prevent a conventional attack on America by the Saddam's government but there are many ways that it could have prevented attacks on the US. Keeping the terrorists busy, showing the liberals middle-east that the US is serious about liberisation of the middle east. In the long term, stability in the middle east will mean less attacks. In the short term, the terrorists are busy in Iraq.
See above. bin Laden did do that in Afghanistan, but he could just as easily be doing it now from Chechnya, Pakistan, or wherever the hell he is. The Taliban wasn't really involved in any manner other than getting paid to look the other way.
You can't seriously believe that do you? The Taliban have a fundamentalist islamic vision and so does bin laden. I really don't see how you can think they were just "paid" to look the other way.
Yes, WE are learning their tactics. They like to ambush us in the hills. Couldn't we have learned that from any insurgency or guerilla operations? Make a case study out of what happened to the Soviets in the 80s in Afghanistan. Same effect. All we're learning is that they're very hard to root out and they like to shoot at us. On the other hand, they are learning how we operate, what equipment we use, what tactics we use, when we use airpower, and what we have at our disposal.
The soviet situation was different. Firstly, they didn't succeed in installing a government and getting 9 out of 10 eligible votes to vote and secondly they didn't have another superpower (america) helping the other side.
Yes, we're seeding liberty all right. We are doing good things in Afghanistan, no doubt. Women have a lot more rights, and there is more infrastructure (though a lot of that is the Caspian Oil Pipeline). Unfortunately, the last estimates I heard from my friends in the military (who were deployed there) were that we maintained a functional control zone of 100m around Kabul. The rest is provisional warlords and druglords.
I agree that it isn't ideal but good things take time. The situation under the taliban wasn't much better (warlords, drug lords etc). The taliban had "methods" for dealing with drugs which "liberal" governments wouldn't agree with.
Anyway, I just can't understand people who run around claming that afghanistan has been destroyed by the US and that they're worse off. I really can't.
Maybe you have missed the fact that the US invaded the country, searched it for month and found absolutly no evidance of any plans to attack to US?
I didn't mean preventing attacks from Saddam himself. Other attacks by extremists could possibility (I don't know for sure) have been avoided because they are now busy in Iraq and in the long term, middle-east stability and liberisation will lead to less tolerance for terror.
Jesus you're retarded
The war didn't prevent any attacks on the US.
And you know that how?
I'm sure Saddamn would have loved to take a crack at us, if he could, but he was an extremely secular leader (not associated with the religious nutjobs in Al-Qaeda) who would not have jeopardized his situation through a terrorist attack on the US. SCUDs didn't have nearly the range to hit the US. They could barely hit Israel.
And he funded suicided bombers in Israel.
Afghanistan is a warzone with no infrastructure (we destroyed it all) largely controlled by regional warlords.
Are you retarded or what? There is *MORE* infrastructure in Afghanistan than there were before the recent war. Afghanistan has been fucked by decades of war and now they are finally on the path to prospoerity. Stop reading the NY times.
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq had the navy or airpower to attack the US.
Yeah, like that's how they would choose to attack the US. Has nothing to do with them funding and homing the terrorists.
Period. All we're doing is giving foreign nationals (most of the terrorists in either country are from Saudi, Pakistan, and other countries) experience fighting that they would have gotten in Chechnya before so they can hit us harder next time once they know our tactics.
Or maybe the YOU are learning their tactics? I mean, if they attack the US they aren't going to be attacking in a conventional way and therefore aren't going to be confronted by an ARMY force are they?
On the other hand, the military are understanding how the extremists work and at the same time are seeding liberty in countries which could certainly benefit from it. Look at Afghanistan for an example. They've made amazing progress in such a short amount of time and many countries (and the UN) are ensuring success. Admittedly Iraq is not as successful (yet).
Stop posting bullshit.
After you.
make a difference and stop bullshitting
This is clearly a fabrication by the bush adminstration to divert attention from new orleans and iraq
/michaelmoore
Voting in the united states for example could be one vote per square mile and everyone currently living in that square mile can hash it out among themselves.
Kyoto is about POLLUTION which is directly related to land mass. Democractic government is not. Anyway, in many democracies, out of compromise, you do see proportional representation based on land mass (electorates).
Or perhaps food supplies, 210 meals a day per square mile, that should destroy the cities pronto. Sorry, I'm not buying it.
The planet belongs to everyone and there is no reason why one individual should have less right to screw it up for their own benefit than any other person.
Exactly my point. Why should China get away with pollution because they have an irresponsibly large population? They should not be punished for having so many children but they must also not be rewarded for being irresponsible as that would be hugely unfair to more responsible countries. So the fair thing to do would to NOT exempt china or india simply because they *choose* to have lots of children.
Anyway, goto beijing and tell me how often you see the sun.
*per capita*
So the chinese have *lots* of children compared to the more responsible people in the US so they should be given an economical advantage advantage?
Sheesh. It should be based on land mass and NOT population.
I ask you to go to a major chinese city and tell me if you can even see the sun through the smog and then compare that to a "bad" US city like LA.
Any idiot knows that China is polluting the world more than the US. The government simply isn't accountable to anyone (not their own people and not to their socialist buddies at the UN).
Yes. One of the things about Maxthon is that you can simple higlight any text on the page and do a small "drag and drop" to part of the page and it'll open up a new tab with the google search results for the text you highlighted and dragged.
I haven't found any firefox plugin that can do that.
Maxthon is to Firefox as FireFox is to IE
Sure. But then, it's like the USA uphold the Geneva convention, anyway - camp X-ray is full of people who'd be able to tell stories you about that.
Get your facts right. The people in camp X-ray were not wearing military fatigues. They are NOT covered by the geneva convention.
Nope. Wikipedia disagrees. But mentions Intarweb as an alternate spelling. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interweb
You must be fun at parties.
Yes, and what's the point of olympic swimming or basketball or programming competitions?
Human achievement inspires lifts the human spirit.
If, as you said, they re-implemented the API using POSIX, then it's NOT a wrapper of Windows calls, is it?
What I meant is that they had to implement Win32 APIs to get Rotor working on BSD.
Yep... they must have rewritten all of Windows and ported it to 4 other platforms. I knew they were good, but not that good!
Well actually if you examine the code for Rotor they did reimplement a lot of Win32 APIs using POSIX calls.
And also your comments are irrelevant cause there's no way in hell NASA World Wind would actually work on Mono or Rotor/BSD. Why? Cause it uses Win32 dependent APIs (DirectX, SWF, etc).
Still, wouldn't rm -rf * also have deleted the '/-r' file?
I think it would have been more like:
rm -f -r etc usr tmp
So -r would have survived.
That's also how I've fixed 3 keyboards that I've had coke/etc mishaps with :-)
Well at least it didn't go something like this:
That would mean generating the valuable cells without using a human egg, and without creating a human embryo, which some people, including President George W. Bush, find objectionable and speaking of which, the grieving mother of a fallen soldier, Cindy Sheehan, who finds Bush just as objectionable is on her way back to the president's crawford ranch.
I wouldn't be offended but I would find it rather odd and even creepy to see videos of some dead guy who once enjoyed living play back a few meters from his buried decomposing corpse.
I guess death gets to me and I'm not religious or superstitious.
Maybe fading slideshows of photos would be a bit better. A picture has often has the ability to capture and convey memories in a way video can not.
Hell, why not just have a physical mechanical device that slides photos around? Would be cheaper and much clearer than any crappy LCD.
What's important is that these drives are single platter 1.8" drives. 40GB and 60GB 1.8" drives have been around for a while but they're double platter and are about 9mm high.
These drives would be great upgrades to tablets like the NEC Litepad.
You're out of touch with reality. You're either a hopeless romantic or you're just simply deluded about human behavior: the good, the bad, and the ugly.
Nah, he's just a card carrying member of the hate America first club.
Whatever it is, I'm sure Al Gore invented it...so yeah, unwholesome.
Case and point: I got modded down troll for saying that.
What do you expect from the geek equivalent of tabloid news?
Since it's going to screw up your golden age regardless of what's causing it, why aren't you interested in doing whatever is possible to reverse it?
Highly predictable response.
If we aren't causing it, then it is possible that there is no way we can stop it. For example, can we stop a volcano from erupting? Even going as far as shutting down all industry may serve to do very little to slow down global warming if, like some believe, it is caused by the heating of the sea (which liberates CO2 into the atmosphere).
If all this is true (I'm not saying whether it is or not -- we don't know), then it would be in our best interests to keep speeding along with our industries so that we can grow the economy and develop techonology that could in the future either fix the problem on earth (domes?
Yep. If you're lucky, the bill will be in your mailbox before you even get back home.
No, the kernel doesn't make that big of a difference
What about driver support? Not trying to be smart but is the driver support in BSD up to the same level as Linux?
Curious people want to know!
You said this:
Boy have you been taking all the propaganda to heart!
And then this:
Go watch Fahrenheit 911.
WTF?