Oh really? there you go giving me more credit at obfuscation than I merit. I am throwing anything in the pot that I think pertains to the conversation as it is a HUGE subject and hard to disect in little spurts and get it perfect (at least for me). If you wish, we can pick a subject and stomp the life out of it until we can see through every angle? Not a bad idea.
of course I smile, all animals bare thier teeth. no really, if I didn't have humor and lightheartedness in everything I do, I would be taking myself way tooo seriously and that would suck. for real. going... going...gone! On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:49 PM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > "So, give me the link if you have the goods." - CB > > Nope, I'll let you enjoy your own search, if it is important to you. > > Same thing for deep sea mapping. (we hadn't discussed waterway mapping > until now, had we?) Please reread how I said I didn't know for sure, > and my judicious use of the term "IF". > > Your examples now presented are of a different order than what your > original claim was based upon. IF you wish to include them into the > mix, I won't oppose it. I just find expanding the topic to include > other things mostly muddies the original discussion. And, the obvious > attempt at using this tactic to nullify my words is troubling, even > though you do it with 'a smile'. > > > On Nov 4, 1:07 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, give me the link if you have the goods. > > > > Also, give me any link on deep sea or waterway mapping that is'nt > > Important? mine discovery and difusion, underwater communication cable > > installation, the freakin huge tunnel under the sea between Britian and > > France, Bridge pylon repair, potential volcanic eruption studies...the > list > > is huge:) > > > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:01 PM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > "... so, how can you blame results from Katrina on old work that was > > > state of the art at the time it was implemented? ..." - CB > > > I have researched it. > > > > > On Nov 4, 12:55 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > before I get to the bottom, please remember the corp of engineers do > not > > > > have authority to just walk into a town like New Orleans and start > > > digging. > > > > It has to go through proper channels, meaning government correct? so, > how > > > > can you blame results from Katrina on old work that was state of the > art > > > at > > > > the time it was implemented? > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:49 PM, ornamentalmind < > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > CB, when I used the term cancer, it was an analogy in response to > your > > > > > (also hyperbolic and comparative as truth) post: > > > > > "…I know this little note is a spoof, but in a global society how > can > > > > > we Not police the planet? that is like letting the guy down the > street > > > > > corner beat the shit out of his wife and kids in his front yard and > > > > > watching without response. Oh, yeah diplomatic > > > > > relations...sanctions...." – CB on 10-28 > > > > > > > Looking at my post in context, I didn't say that I was 'against > > > > > anything military'. In general, I accepted the reality of the > > > > > situation. "I do not deny that today, yesterday, tomorrow, a year > from > > > > > now as well as a hundred years ago there were, are and will be > those > > > > > who wish to do harm to other people including the people currently > in > > > > > the USA. When this 'truth' is 'solved' by becoming State Terrorists > in > > > > > a perpetual war, a greater 'truth' arises and that is that 'we' > > > > > perpetually are attracting an even greater amount of ire. This > 'truth' > > > > > has always been known." – Orn – 10-28 > > > > > > > I do find the Orwelian notion of perpetual war against a method > rather > > > > > than people for political purposes with obvious and well known > results > > > > > to be as close to 'sin' as one who does not embrace the notion of > sin > > > > > can find. > > > > > > > Also, my direct observation about the two methods of: > > > > > 1. Agreement > > > > > 2. Force > > > > > …would seem to be reality based in this context too. > > > > > > > You continue with a list of organizations including Homeland > Security. > > > > > Here, since even many within the organization think it was at the > very > > > > > best ill-conceived, and at the worst an impediment for response, a > > > > > bloated and grossly expensive bureaucracy that in fact does nothing > > > > > better, same people in functions etc. I question why you even > > > > > mentioned it. > > > > > > > The Army Corp of Engineers are well known to emulate beavers. They > > > > > have built bridges for decades, many of which were not necessary, > many > > > > > of which were poorly conceived and implemented. [see: New Orleans > > > > > among a legion of other places] This is all well documented and > > > > > available for all to know. So, at least in this way I am against > this > > > > > group. > > > > > > > I don't know much about the National Guard, other than it is not > only > > > > > being grossly abused and misused, leaving the 'nation' at risk to > > > > > 'homeland' issues from natural disasters to the omnipresent > 'invasion' > > > > > across our boarders. > > > > > > > This leaves the Coast Guard. Again, since it is mainly being used > for > > > > > the 'War on Drugs'….. And, how is that war going? (irony) > > > > > > > Little of the above criticizes the individuals in each > organization. > > > > > More to the point the different group functions, methods, > > > > > administration and leadership as well as how each is directed by > the > > > > > current regime, are more of what should be examined. > > > > > > > When it comes to the Arctic, sadly this area is on the way out. Oh, > do > > > > > you reject global warming? If so, I'll have to support this I > guess. > > > > > When it comes to the Antarctic, see: > > >http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1093824/ > > > > > A WONDERFUL and informative movie. The clips alone are worth the > time. > > > > > > > You say that deep-sea mapping wouldn't exist w/o the military. > While I > > > > > don't know for sure, my guess is that either it would be done by > the > > > > > educational system, 'publish or die', scientific community, other > > > > > countries or by the private sector IF it is in fact worthwhile in > any > > > > > objective sense. > > > > > > > You next ask, rhetorically perhaps, about satellite technology. > Again, > > > > > even the original satellites (Russian) were developed in academic > > > > > settings. The original deployment system for North America was > going > > > > > to be a plane and 'business' and nationalism got in the way. Of > > > > > course, since the vast majority of all satellites in use today are > for > > > > > covert military use, your question is almost a tautology. > > > > > > > When one does a review of US history, we did quite well without a > > > > > standing army for quite a while. In fact, it was proposed by > Jefferson > > > > > to explicitly outlaw one in the Constitution. A good overview of > the > > > > > situation and foundational ideas can be found here: > > > > >http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0505-08.htm > > > > > > > Next, you ask the Faustian question of "…Sanctions only work if > they > > > > > are backed up by potential force. Would you privatize all of it?.." > > > > > > > First, we can do an analysis of 'sanctions'. However, since there > are > > > > > thousands of 'em, I won't take the time to do so now. IF you have > > > > > specific ones you are interested in, we can do that. As to > privatizing > > > > > the military, that has already happened. Well, not every last > person, > > > > > but everything from the mess tent to toilet paper, from Blackwater > to > > > > > Haliburton. And, of course, the private sector is always more > > > > > expensive. Articles about the cost of the war are ubiquitous. Here > is > > > > > one from a year or so ago: > > > > >http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2007/03/the_cost.html > > > > > > > As I've said, IF I could, I would reinstate the draft. And, for > other > > > > > views about the military industrial complex, I'll assume you are > > > > > familiar with Eisenhower's last speech about it. > > > > > > > Your question, "What would happen to civilian flight all over the > > > > > planet without the constant threat of military airbases strung > > > > > throughout?" perplexes me, so I won't address it now. > > > > > > > Your next question, "The world would be plunged in petty > dictatorships > > > > > and out the window with globalization don't you think?" seems to > > > > > tacitly include many assumptions. Shouldn't we begin with these > first? > > > > > > > When you said "It is more complex that just spending money on "the > > > > > war" in Iraq.", you state the obvious and in no way would/could I > > > > > disagree. > > > > > > > However, "The whole machinery is inextricable from our lives.", > > > > > appears to reject free will or at least a more detailed and > holistic > > > > > analysis and understanding. > > > > > > > And, in this and most situations, I don't look for the dichotomy. > Your > > > > > wish to find 'balance' between two sides reduces most things to > polar > > > > > opposites. As effective as this is in simplifying issues, I find it > > > > > seldom brings about wisdom or knowledge. > > > > > > > "We agree the military was misused in Iraq. What were better > options? > > > > > More sanctions?" - CB > > > > > > > This is an enormous question that can even be traced back to when > the > > > > > Britt stumbled out of his tent drunk one night and said the border > of > > > > > Iraq would be 'there' as he stumbled and fell on the sand in a > > > > > stupor. > > > > > > > Quickly though, 'better options' were to leave a sovereign nation > > > > > alone as global law dictated. OR, once occupied, get out! The > > > > > sanctions were draconian and caused the suffering and loss of life > to > > > > > untold numbers of citizens. Perhaps, after 10 years, recognize the > > > > > quagmire? Perhaps, elect a president with an IQ higher than a > plant? > > > > > Perhaps accept the intel acquired as 'true'? Perhaps, not pit Iraq > > > > > against Iran for over a decade? The list of much better options > could > > > > > reach the moon. > > > > > > > "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." – CB > > > > > > > What exactly did you do/are you doing to support and/or fight for > > > > > these ideals? I'm not privy to your personal life. > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 7:42 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > 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 > > > > ... > > > > read more »- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
