Orn, been thinking on this conversation and the root of it. Are you against anything military? you mentioned it as a "cancer"... What of the Coast Guard, Army Corp of Engineers, Homeland Security, and National Guard sections? For instance, research in the arctic would be more than difficult without the support structure of the military. Deep-sea mapping would be non-existent. What of Satellite technology? What would you propose instead of a standing army you consider a cancer? Sanctions only work if they are backed up by potential force. Would you privatize all of it? What would happen to civilian flight all over the planet without the constant threat of military airbases strung throughout? The world would be plunged in petty dictatorships and out the window with globalization don't you think? It is more complex that just spending money on "the war" in Iraq. The whole machinery is inextricable from our lives. No, I am not picking on you because I think you are a peace-nik. I just want balance in the issue and one side of the story is not enough.
We agree the military was misused in Iraq. What were better options? More sanctions? I believe in the peaceful demonstrations of Ghandi and others like him. I would fight for ideals displayed at Tianamen Square and The Wall, and would personally prevent someone from lopping off a peaceful demonstrator's head so he could sit for hours undisturbed, making his own point. It is inextricable, this war and peace. On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > "...I am sorry to be distracted but I am trying not to laugh my derier > off in response to the Thorn Clone and may have jumped about too much > - my communications problem again:) apologies..." - CB > > Accepted. That particular sort of flame warrior is best ignored. A > good analogy in the courrent context is Tar Baby. > http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/tar+baby > > > On Nov 3, 12:55 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I brought up return on investment trying to figure out if there was any > > positive side to the innovations brought about by the military machine. > I > > asked for specific innovations anyone could trace to the military. It > would > > be better to have used a positive inflection and say "what positive > results > > have been achieved? I am sorry to be distracted but I am trying not to > laugh > > my derier off in response to the Thorn Clone and may have jumped about > too > > much - my communications problem again:) apologies... > > > > Okay, where were we? yes, what innovations of a positive nature have been > > directly produced in relation to the military machine? composites? MRE's? > I > > mean anything? > > > > Yeah, crossbow wasnt a positive creation was it? I mean the application > had > > one intent...oops:) > > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:43 PM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps you can expand more beyond the cross bow? I found you started > > > out dealing with finance (ROI) and now appear to have shifted to > > > 'innovation'...and then to something that is 'solely military'. So, > > > sorry, no, I can't help here. I know of nothing that is 'solely > > > military'. > > > > > And, the list I presented had only one purpose, to fill in the few > > > examples of contractors I had typed, nothing more. > > > > > On Nov 3, 12:22 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I posed a question only of what innovations given by the crucible of > > > > war...I feel you still taking the tack that I am pro-war thus perhaps > > > > too defensive! Guess I should go further back to the original Roman > > > > standing cross bow to make my question clearer. Is there anything > you > > > > can separate out that is solely military? I am asking for help here? > > > > regardless of ROI...:) > > > > > > YOU got to be kidding on the "research claimed" though? That list of > > > > Army contractors tells us where they get thier supplies commercially, > > > > not where the research originated. So, in essence, you say Skunkworks > > > > itself gets thier designs from a publicly funded university? That I > > > > can't wholly believe. Sure, some of it is shared, no one disputes > > > > that, much innovation has always been commandeered by military for > > > > military use. Much of it is funded/started by the military after they > > > > have leveraged the scientists doing the research into a corner, > afraid > > > > to lose their jobs if they don't capitulate. That does not mean they > > > > don't work directly for Skunk on skunk property, paid by Skunk. > Scaled > > > > Composites is on the NYSE, but I don't own stock in it:) Skunk is > much > > > > sexier stock... > > > > > > If you can drop the anti-military set for just a moment and scrape > > > > through to the innovations - separate them from the killing machine? > > > > > > On Nov 3, 1:58 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > "…War is a crucible of innovation…" – CB > > > > > > > Having been a CFO, ROI is of little value when doing a full > > > > > situational analysis. > > > > > > > And, when it comes to R & D, almost all 'research' claimed by > Boeing, > > > > > Lockheed Martin, GE, etc. (see: > > >http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/ > > > > > ) is in fact produced in publicly funded Universities and then > taken/ > > > > > given to the private sector. Since 'we' have to pay for everything > the > > > > > private sector makes with no credit for our initial funding, I > don't > > > > > see how much 'benefit' can be claimed, at least not in a material > nor > > > > > financial way. > > > > > > > Overall, the military budget is seen as being bloated and wasteful. > > > > > While a political reference and only a very quick overview, some > > > > > information can be gleaned at: > > >http://www.votenader.org/issues/military-budget/ > > > > > > > As to Burt Rutan, perhaps he influenced the BD series that found > it's > > > > > way into Budwiser commercials as well as James Bond films. And, of > > > > > course, Scaled is owned by Northrop Grumman. Since this company is > on > > > > > the NYSE (NOC), perhaps one can get a great ROI by purchasing > stock? > > > > > > > Of course, you would be owning a lot of waste too. Cases in point: > > > > > "Based on year 2002 data, researchers at the Political Economy > > > > > Research Institute of the University of Massachusetts identified > > > > > Northrop Grumman as the 17th-largest corporate producer of air > > > > > pollution in the United States; according to their study, Northrop > > > > > Grumman facilities released more than 520,000 pounds of toxic > > > > > chemicals into the air in that year." > > > > > "The corporation has also been linked to 52 superfund toxic waste > > > > > sites." > > > > > "In 2003, the company was among 84 parties with which the United > > > > > States Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of > > > > > Justice, and the state of New York reached an estimated US$ 15 > million > > > > > settlement for the rehabilitation of the Mattiace Petrochemical > > > > > Company Superfund site in Glen Cove, Long Island; in the same year, > > > > > Northrop Grumman agreed to pay $33,214 after EPA inspectors found > > > > > hazardous waste violations at the Capistrano test site." > > > > > > > "Northrop Grumman has had to deal with multiple scandals during its > > > > > history. The company was sued in 1999 for allegedly knowingly > giving > > > > > the Navy defective aircraft. This suit seeks $210 million in > damages > > > > > and is ongoing. Then in 2003, the company was sued for allegedly > > > > > overcharging the U.S. government for space projects in the 1990s. > > > > > Northrop Grumman paid $111.2 million to settle that suit out of > > > > > court." > > > > > > > You can also see how they figure into the purchase of political > > > > > power.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman > > > > > > > So, yes, I agree, the full story may include a lot of different > issues > > > > > and the 'bottom line', in this case deemed to be financial, > continues > > > > > to appear to be a big loss. > > > > > > > On Nov 3, 7:26 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I did not suggest we should ever start a war to promote R&D. My > > > > > > question better put was, if anything, what innovative gains have > we > > > > > > made? I just wonder how it rolls out on paper...it is an aspect > that > > > > > > is interesting. War is a crucible of innovation. Nasty for > sure, > > > but > > > > > > it happens. > > > > > > > > I'm just glad folks like Burt Rutan are going to the outer limits > of > > > > > > the atmosphere with private funding, sans military. > > > > > > > > On Nov 3, 9:20 am, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - all I can see is a huge defecit. R&D can be > performed in > > > > > > > many locations. We don't need to start, and try to control, a > civil > > > > > > > war to practice on. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 3, 9:04 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Wonder how all that spendage relates in a return on > investment as > > > regards > > > > > > > > to military research and development? what is the return on > > > investment? I > > > > > > > > know of some: composites, computer security...can anyone else > see > > > any > > > > > > > > positive return on military R&D? > > > > > > > > > > wonder if anyone has numbers on that side? [?] > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Clogtowner < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - yes, it is almost as much as I lost last month > > > during the > > > > > > > > > debacle. > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 1, 10:26 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" < > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > $3,000,000,000,000 for a war is a lot of money. That is > more > > > money > > > > > > > > > > than I made since the beginning of the war. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 1, 10:55 pm, ornamentalmind < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.good.is/?p=12104-Hidequotedtext- > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > 329.gif > > > > > > > > < 1KViewDownload- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
