ScottSA

Two interesting points here. First, we have the incredibly transparent tactic of drawing an association between holocaust "denial" and "GW "denial", as if there is the slightest moral connection between the two. "Denying" that man is causing global warming simply means that someone is asking for, and not getting, reasonable evidence of manmade GW, based on more than garbageingarbageout "models" which can't even predict weather a week in advance. The imaginary association is strengthened of course by the inclusion of "racism" to the sentence, since in Woody's world only "racists" would deny GW. Second, we have a complete muddling of the argument, as if "pollution" is synomymous with CO2. I suppose one could describe CO2 as either a pollutant or a source of nourishment for vegetation, but "dealing with pollution" is not the same thing as dealing with CO2. Love Canal wasn't cleaned up because of a surfiet of CO2. So this transparent tactic is meant to suggest that anyone who points to the economic disaster of trying to come anywhere close to Kyoto limits is really all about throwing newspapers on roads, crapping in drinking water and burning rain forest.

Is is math or demographics of which you're woefully ignorant? Or both, I suppose. Oh, I'm not woefully ignorant, and tens of thousands is actually quite conservative, given that the 7% of British Muslims who think 911 and the tube bombings were a good thing amount to around 7000 alone. Christ there are at least ten thousand deaths a year around the globe a year directly attributable to Islam, and they aren't done by one person. Sometimes geometry is the best descriptor. Reading your reply I think: greater than 90 degrees and less than 180 degrees. I don't pretend to understand what the above is supposed to mean, if anything more than a sophomoric insult, but you have failed to rebutt me with anything but sarcastic innuendo, so apparently you're just looking for a fight. The "tiny minority" of radical Islamists numbers in the tens of thousands worldwide. That's not only a fact, but it's also intuitively true for anyone with the patience to look honestly at Islam. I would hazard a guess that there are many more than 10,000 of them in Iraq alone, wouldn't you?

Errr, pardon me, but the glorification of war has been around since, oh, 5000 BC or so, and in fact it is only since the war to end all wars that it has fallen out of favor in the western psyche. This is a rant straight out of one of Lenin's polemics matched with the entire bumper sticker litany of the "progressive" left. It's erroneous in its facts and amounts to hysterical mudflinging.

I have also read that the logistical tail on the Abrams was quite a burden, but it has to understood in the context of a platform designed during the cold war, it probably wasn't meant to travel very far (west germany to westerner germany.... The other criticism is it's sheer size make it a liability in urban warfare (which is neither here nor there in the AFghan context....). The problem being once up a residential baghdad street it can't turn its turret. The lesson learned is, Abrams don't go up narrow baghdad streets. Yes, but that addresses the cost. What about its function as a main battle tank? There are other armoured vehicles for use in urban close combat, but in the initial invasion across Iraq, it certainly didn't have a lot of failings.What about the sand problem? I know the early M1As had problems with sand during GWI, and the problem was subsequently fixed, but what about the Ls? Have they been modified for desert warfare?

That won't change them one bit, but would definitely turn us into something we believe we have left in the past. Besides, it was already tried in the past, with questionnable effect. When have we tried it in the past, and what do you mean it didn't work? The last time we ran around with heads on pikes was in the late Middle Ages (except the French, who during an interlude between surrenderings, took the opportunity to behead their nobility). But that aside, you claim it won't work. Why not? Arab armies, from Iberia to Kartoum, have traditionally respected ONLY force. In fact. a central theme to the Koran is force...most of the early Muslims converted either because they were forced to or because they respected the force commanded by Mohammed. The Koran makes no bones about it. Certainly the Pastun only respect force. We're not fighting folks with centuries of European tradition behind them. We're not in a fight with folks who have mutually understood rules of warfare or rules of engagement. The dervishes for instance, just over 100 years ago, practised the same traditional treatment of prisoners as most Arab armies: cut off the hands, feet and genitals of men and enslave the women and children. Really quite simple. No POW camps to be found there. So what would happen if we started fighting them like they fight us? You claim it "won't change them one bit, but you have no idea whether it's true or not. I rather expect you're wrong. I don't mean by the use of suicide bombers; I mean by the indiscriminate rounding up of civilians and slaughtering them in retribution for each act of terror. The Germans used the tactic occasionally and it was extremely successful. The British used it after the Indian rebellion of 1856 and it worked wonders. The reason we won't act like them is that our beliefs are better than theirs. Some here, including you, draw up false comparisons between Iran's cowardly British prisoners and Abu Griab, but that's simply not an apt comparison. I'm sure the Iranian prisoners the Americans have are being treated the same as the British prisoners were. Abu Griab was an anomoly...that's why it's so well known. Careers were lost and people went to jail for it, and no-one even died. An apt comparison is comparing Nick Berg having his head sawn off vs the traditional treatment of POWs by the Americans. No al Queda lost his job or freedom over that and numerous other cold-blooded and INTENTIONAL murders. Quite the contrary; they were celebrated heros of Islam. We are better than they are. Our institutions are better, our social contract is kinder and our industrial and technological feats are unrivalled. The reason we don't adopt their tactics is because our society is better than theirs. Which is not to say the ROE shouldn't be loosened a bit. You nailed it right on, the real question is, if and why we want to be there (in Afganistan, Iraq and so on)? However, too many statements you make are taken on pure assumption. What is legitimate government of a country invaded and occupied by foreign troops? If a government is a legitimate one (in the full sense of the word), wouldn't it imply that it should able to at least maintain basic security in the country on its own, without massive foreign support? What is the meaning of election in a place which does not have any tradition of electing its government? And so on.. You're assuming conditions to sovereignty that simply don't apply. Do you agree that the former West German and Japanese governments were/are legitimate in spite of being "installed" by the same folks who "installed" the Afghan government? How does the ability to supply basic security affect the legitimacy of a government? Neither Luxembourg nor the Vatican have the resources for a police state clampdown, yet no one is suggesting that they lack legitimacy. No I suggest first of all trying to understand where and why you're going, then what are you trying you to achieve there, and finally how you're going to do it so that it actually stands a chance of success. How are those things not understood? We're there to deny al Queda the national base it had. That's done. As a correlary, we're there to overthrow the tyranny of the Taliban, disrupt to the point of irrelevancy its future appeal, and in aid of all this build infrastructure that allows social reform a fighting chance.

I'm no expert in armour, but I instinctively questioned the assertion that the LII was better than the MIA2, so I started reading an ADF forum about the LII(5-6)s, and the impression I get is that the MIA2s are better than the LII(6)s but more expensive. Link Meaning no disrespect, what is your info based on? Why the disagreement? Is this a Ford vs Chevy thing or are there specific tests concluding that one is better than the other and why?

Is is math or demographics of which you're woefully ignorant? Or both, I suppose. Oh, I'm not woefully ignorant, and tens of thousands is actually quite conservative, given that the 7% of British Muslims who think 911 and the tube bombings were a good thing amount to around 7000 alone. Christ there are at least ten thousand deaths a year around the globe a year directly attributable to Islam, and they aren't done by one person. Don't walk into an argument you'll lose, ok? You get so reportish when you get whupped.

I imagine in a windless moonscape bees would be even more important for crosspollination. Fortunately we have wind, and plants managed to struggle along cross pollinating long before bees showed up. Of course, lots of other insects also contribute to crosspollination, and I hear birds do a lot of it too. Anyway, of course bees dying is a problem, but when all the conspiracy freaks and granola eaters show up at once claiming either that the Bushwhore is afoot or that the world is about to end, again, then it's a little hard to take seriously. Woody of course won't get the irony of calling people Luddites and then condemning GM foods, and the other one trackers won't budge from a deep conviction that they KNOW the TRVTH, so there's not much point in taking things seriously.

You are making all the facts up to fit your theory. How is it "strengthening authoritarian regime in Iran"? No it's not. Nor is it, by all accounts, widespread in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Sure it gets the Taliban, the Baathists and al Queda all het up, but they aren't going to vote next election anyway, so who cares? Even the handpicked Iraqis Code Pink went to whine at don't want the US to leave. You're essentially taking the enemy's point of view and using it to claim no-one liks the US.

And I wonder why he sticks around war zones. Because some people are very good at war. Mercenary is actually quite an honorable profession, but it doesn't mean "Dogs of War" or psycho; this is one incident, like Abu Griab, and you're not using critical thinking faculties by tarring several thousand mercs in Iraq with a single brush because of one bad apple. Especially when you piously refuse to tar all Muslims as one in spite of tens of thousands of bad apples. Mercs these days are more or less security guards who happen to have lots of weapons training and combat skills.

Who are 'these people'? Name some names. Figleaf aka Curly is one name.

I'd be interesting in hearing about these obvious and distinctly new problems.

Check out where most of your latest modern electronics come from. Where are they manufactured? I guess I should have made a distinction between military/dual use and consumer technology. They are very far behind in terms of the former.

I'm not one to tattle, but I think ScottSA should be removed from this forum. He is obviously a psyc - op officer. No one could be this stupid for real and still be able to type. He is here to use nonsense and stupidity to generate frustration IMO. I may be a minion of the evil Bushwhoreitler, but you are a certified psych patient.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Have you noticed that any thread that descends into pointless chaos usually has his fingerprints all over it? Because you incessantly tattle on me?

Really? Do tell. So the Jews did it, eh?

I have a novel idea. If they've lived in igloos for 5000 years, isn't it time to upgrade the living habits anyway? I don't know what my ancestors were living in 5000 years ago, but I'm not interested in living in it myself.

The Machine is in Israel. The Zionists have it. It also controls Bush's mind and slays Arab babies.

I have upgraded my Commodore 64 and now it is a TRS 80.....I have a tape drive just like they do a NASA...still though, the only sound I get is the ocassional *wirrrr, *click* *Bzzzzz*........... Just hit a snare drum in erratic bursts and invite someone with Tourettes to shout out the occasional bathroom word and you'll have the soundtrack at least. If you have gas it's better, because you can throw in the odd explosive sound too.

This one, linked here (because it's secret) was definitely "constructed in absolute secrecy by the buffoon Bush and his evil Zionist elves".Please keep this confidential, since it could undo the US's political stability. There is some question as to whether that was Bush. Many scientists believe it was Elvis. Some even think it could have been Elvis's soul reincarnated as a butterfly in Japan.

You forgot to mention the people who believe in the conspiracy theory that global warming is a hoax and a socialist scheme. Funny how right-wingers always conveniently leave that one out. Let's not forget there are conspiracy theorists on BOTH the extreme left and extreme right. You produce 6 billion witnesses, photographic evidence, and convincing science that global warming is manmade and I'll jump on the bandwagon too. Until then, any comparison between it and 911 is specious at best.

How many varieties of sustainable edible plant life is self pollinatiting or hermaphroditic naturaly in nature? How many species of insects aid in cross pollination? And I wonder how many of them are dying off as well. Mother Nature or God or whatever you want to call her will rid herself of pests. The one in danger now is Man. There are none so blind as he who will not see and the arrogance of man is unbelievable. Ah, so now we've moved on to all the insects dying. Next we'll have to slide Global Warming in under the door just to make this complete.

My culture believes we should pluck the eyeballs out of moral relativists. Is this cultural moray ok with you? When can you visit for your introduction to comparitive culture? Utter hogwash. What other way should we find to "deal" with it? How about getting off the fence and saying that killing civilians is wrong, period. Who cares what their "culture" says about it? It's wrong. They are wrong.

There's not much difference between a matchbox car and a real car except one has room for people and is much bigger. Speaking of weak arguments. Here: maybe this will help http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&defl=en&...nition&ct=title

They use it because it has legs. They're not as bad as the Liberals. Everyone knows it. It's not surprising they use it. Nor is it surprising that Liberal supporters gnash their teeth at it, because, well, what can ya say? The absolute lamest thing to say is "but the Cons ought to be held to a different standard", because that underscores the cynicism of the Liberal supporter while accentuating the slime covering the Liberals. Mind you, I don't KNOW what I'd say in defence of the Libs if I were a Lib supporter. Glad I don't have that task on my plate.