Ray Ludenia wrote:
Last poll* I heard here in Aus had 53% against and 39% for. Surprisingly
little change in numbers after the Bali massacre.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/06/opinion/polls/main524496.shtml
CBS News poll:
More people now than just two weeks ago favor giving the
From: His Brinness [EMAIL PROTECTED]
John, you are too close to the problem. Step back.
Again I ask, do you envision Planet Earth still being divided into
completely separate sovereign nations with capricious right-of-war
and subject to no overall legal authority, say, 1,000 years from
Kevin Street wrote:
John D. Giorgis reponded:
ALL those allies?The UK, Australia, Spain, and Italy are all behind
the US attack on Iraq - and those are just the ones that I have heard of.
This is just my opinion, but I suspect that the majority of the people in
those countries don't
O.k. folks, what is going on here? In the past few days, we have heard
Dr. Brin argue:
1) The no-brainer solution to Iraq, is to divide up Iraq and Iraq's oil
resources between the non-Arab Kurds and the non-Sunni Shiites, without any
regard for how this might inflame the Sunni-Arab street.
2)
Deborah Harrell wrote:
I find eating hot salsa and drinking plenty of hot
tea, along with 'steaming,' effective treatment for
many a stuffy nose. (And with allergies ~ 9 months of
the year, I have plenty of practice! :P )
I only have a good cure for a really bad cold. It involves a hot tub
J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Through cooperation with other
freedom-loving democratic countries, or by unilaterally deciding to ignore
all those potential allies, storming into country after country with all
guns blazing, and alienating all those other freedom-loving countries from
you in the process?
Julia Thompson wrote:
Getting ridiculous, how about we start by dissolving the composition of
the Security Council and let Canada decide who sits on the new one? It
can't be any worse than it is now for democracies, to let Canada run a
few things for a bit. And nobody is suspicious of Canada,
d.brin wrote:
Pleese! Only put Brin: in the subject line if it seriously
needs my attention. Interesting. Topical. Urgent or about real SF.
I gotta hide for a couple of weeks. See you all after the election
... about which you already know how I feel.
Thrive. All of you!
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Sinus washing with saline salution is a useful (but
admittedly disgusting! :P) technique for removing
infected mucus (aka green gunk), but I recommend it
only to those who are truly _miserable_ with severe
sinusitis. The key is to 'snork' not sniff the
solution; salt
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 07:02:27AM -0500, Ronn Blankenship wrote:
I note that we still have not received any account of the
circumstances and the decision process which led Julia to snort salt .
. .
Okay, Jero..., uhhh, I mean Ronn. One query is enough! :-)
--
Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ronn Blankenship wrote:
I note that we still have not received any account of the circumstances and
the decision process which led Julia to snort salt . . .
Let's say I was in college, hadn't necessarily had enough sleep, and
other people had been snorting less painful substances (e.g.,
Pleese! Only put Brin: in the subject line if it seriously
needs my attention. Interesting. Topical. Urgent or about real SF.
I gotta hide for a couple of weeks. See you all after the election
... about which you already know how I feel.
Thrive. All of you!
With cordial regards,
At 11:48 PM 10/22/2002 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Through cooperation with other
freedom-loving democratic countries, or by unilaterally deciding to ignore
all those potential allies, storming into country after country with all
guns blazing, and alienating all those other freedom-loving
--- Ritu Ko wrote:
Ronn Blankenship wrote:
Snorting Coke, or Pepsi, or Sprite (which is the
one I have the most
experience with) is much more pleasant in
comparison.
Done voluntarily, I suppose it would clean out
your sinuses . . .
Well, warm water is better for that - in one
--- Adam C. Lipscomb wrote:
snip
I always thought a merkin was a pubic wig, which is
why I resent the term.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=merkin
mer·kin Pronunciation Key (mûrkn)
n. A pubic wig for women.
So maybe we could find another slang term for
Americans? Please?
I
At 17:06 20-10-2002 -0400, John Giorgis wrote:
You asked me to answer, Why do European conutries continue to insist on UN
support if they consider the UN to be a discredited organization?
If I respond to that question, with the statement: The Europeans don't
believe that the UN is discredited
At 12:55 PM 10/20/2002 -0700 d.brin wrote:
Again I ask, do you envision Planet Earth still being divided into
completely separate sovereign nations with capricious right-of-war
and subject to no overall legal authority, say, 1,000 years from now?
When you squint at our future, sending starships
At 04:58 PM 10/21/02, Deborah Harrell wrote:
--- Adam C. Lipscomb wrote:
snip
I always thought a merkin was a pubic wig, which is
why I resent the term.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=merkin
mer·kin Pronunciation Key (mûrkn)
n. A pubic wig for women.
So maybe we could find another
This below is truly amazing, John. You cling to the notion of a
future situation as absolutely similar to our present situation as
you can possibly craft. You want the future to be 2002 but a little
nicer, a little more americanized.
You need, desperately need to recognize how your own
Ray Ludenia wrote:
d.brin wrote:
You are taking the word of a man who admits to have snorted coke, and
who has every political reason to say whatever it takes to win an
election.
Hey, bit strong! I think it is a bit rash to to criticise someone for
snorting coke. Haven't you ever
At 09:14 PM 10/19/2002 -0700 d.brin wrote:
At 11:16 PM 10/19/2002 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Why is it seemingly impossible for you to answer the question of why
countries would insist on UN support if they consider the UN to be a
discredited body? (And yes, you may consider that the
At 09:38 PM 10/20/2002 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
This is false; you really need to work on your quoting skills. The question
is why countries (European and other) would insist on UN support *IF* they
consider the UN to be a discredited organisation.
Given the fact that all those countries
Once again, taking things back on-line, where it belongs.
At 14:59 18-10-2002 -0700, John Giorgis wrote:
This looks like a prime example of deliberately providing
misinformation in an attempt to validate your point. First, it is for
the *entire* EU, not the EMU (Economic and Monetary Union)
At 04:51 PM 10/19/2002 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Or is it just that the Europeans realize all these things and still don't
consider the UN to be discredited?
You should get more familiarised with the structure of the UN. You complain
about the credibility (or lack thereof) of the Security
At 11:46 19-10-2002 -0400, John Giorgis wrote:
So, let's see some proof, or be a man about it and admit that your
statement is false.
So Jeroen, does insulting the manhood of someone you are asking questions
to make that person more likely or less likely to answer your questions?
Well,
At 11:37 19-10-2002 -0400, John Giorgis wrote:
Anyhow, if you knew the first thing about the United Nations, you would
know that the UN Charter assigns responsibility for peace and security
matters to the UN Security Council.Thus, since the Security Council is
a completely discredited body
At 06:20 PM 10/19/2002 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Incredible. I ask the same question *twice*, and both times you evade it.
So, third attempt, why would countries insist on UN support if they
consider the UN to be a discredited body?
BTW, may I ask why you keep insulting Europeans by
Concerning the EU and federalism, there is actually an argument that has
immediate relevance to what has been discussed here.
In brief, the point is that power and responsibility should go hand in
hand. The idea of strengthening the European Union is precisely aimed at
improving both (1)
At 22:28 17-10-2002 -0400, John Giorgis wrote:
Meanwhile, the EU is completely mistrusted by the European citizenry,
As a citizen of the European Union, I can say that this claim is an
exaggeration. It is not the EU we distrust, it is only the *politicians* we
distrust, especially since we
At 22:44 17-10-2002 -0400, John Giorgis wrote:
The question Dr. Brin, is not how sure are we that Hussein has a nuclear
weapons program, the question is How sure are you that he does not?
You can not justify an attack against any country with that kind of
reasoning, which is why this kind of
John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 07:00 PM 10/13/2002 -0700 d.brin wrote:
Do you have ANY british friends? have you bothered
even remotely to find out what other people in other
lands think? Under Clinton we were admired. Nearly
all foreigners were puzzled/amazed by Monicagate.
They nearly now
J. van Baardwijk wrote:
If an American would be put on trial at the ICC on charges of war
crimes, would you also find it acceptable if Europe would attack the
US to prevent the US from invading The Netherlands?
I know that America's refusal to participate in the ICC bothers you, Jeroen.
on 18/10/02 7:04 pm, Jim Sharkey at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have two words for you: Ira Einhorn.
He murdered his girlfriend, mummified her, and stuffed her in a trunk. He
fled the country, and was living quite well in Europe. He was tried in
absentia in Pennsylvania, and given the
Dan Minette wrote:
a lot of stuff which I wish I had more tome to reply to...
Unfortunately, from my vantage point, the support was a mile wide and an
inch thick.
But it was something decent leadership could have worked with rather
than treating it with veiled contempt.
Doug
From: Dan Minette [mailto:dsummersminet;houston.rr.com]
In short, the practical way to stop a unipolar world is not
for the US to
promise to get permission before it acts at all. Rather, it
is for other
countries to be able to actually act, instead of just telling
the US how to
act.
From: Dan Minette [mailto:dsummersminet;houston.rr.com]
In short, the practical way to stop a unipolar world is not
for the US to
promise to get permission before it acts at all. Rather, it
is for other
countries to be able to actually act, instead of just telling
the US how to
act.
I
Dr. Brin wrote:
From: Dan Minette [mailto:dsummersminet;houston.rr.com]
In short, the practical way to stop a unipolar world is not
for the US to
promise to get permission before it acts at all. Rather, it
is for other
countries to be able to actually act, instead of just
Doug wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
a lot of stuff which I wish I had more tome to reply to...
Was that a Freudian slip? ;-)
__
Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brin-L list pages
At 04:23 PM 10/15/2002 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
Dig it again, folks. The Brits have come aboard, but read their
press. Even THEY don't want this dogwag spasm. And when the brits
don't want a war, something is very very bad about the plan.
So, we have a fairly contemporary example of England
At 09:30 PM 10/16/2002 -0700 d.brin wrote:
d.brin wrote:
I totally agree with this. Indeed, anyone who peers forward 100
years and foresees this as stable is crazy. Pax Americana can only
be a transition state... like all other Paxii.
Well actually, aren't all states transitional in the long
At 12:16 AM 10/17/2002 -0700 Doug wrote:
Unfortunately, from my vantage point, the support was a mile wide and an
inch thick.
But it was something decent leadership could have worked with rather
than treating it with veiled contempt.
Now that's uncalled for. the Bush Administration didn't
Steve Sloan II wrote:
Doug wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
a lot of stuff which I wish I had more tome to reply to...
Was that a Freudian slip? ;-)
ROTFL! I wish it had been intentional.
8^)
Doug
___
--- Adam C. Lipscomb wrote:
snip
And, in light of our recent discussions, this
fascinating and
thought-provoking interview with retired general
Anthony Zinni in Salon:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/10/17/zinni/index.html
Zinni... challenged their suggestion
that installing a
d.brin wrote:
Moreover, I am all in favor of Pax Americana, which has led to vastly
more human opportunity and happiness than any other 'pax', and which
may lead to a world of Justice and Law.
This may indeed be the case. However, I cannot for the life of me understand
how so many Merkins
I wrote:
d.brin wrote:
Moreover, I am all in favor of Pax Americana, which has led to vastly
more human opportunity and happiness than any other 'pax', and which
may lead to a world of Justice and Law.
This may indeed be the case. However, I cannot for the life of me understand
how so
- Original Message -
From: Ray Ludenia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 9:05 AM
Subject: Re: brin: war
d.brin wrote:
Moreover, I am all in favor of Pax Americana, which has led to vastly
more human opportunity and happiness than any other
d.brin wrote:
Moreover, I am all in favor of Pax Americana, which has led to vastly
more human opportunity and happiness than any other 'pax', and which
may lead to a world of Justice and Law.
This may indeed be the case. However, I cannot for the life of me understand
how so many
I'd rather be known as a Hern instead of a Merkin, but that would make me a
very small minority in this list.
**sigh**
William Taylor
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: d.brin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 6:16 PM
Subject: RE: brin: war
Dig it again, folks. The Brits have come aboard, but read their
press. Even THEY don't want this dogwag spasm. And when the brits
don't want
Trent Shipley wrote:
(...) Second, realigning the borders of sovereign
states to correspond to areas of national presence
invariably results in bloody destabilazation of
entire regions. Witness sorting out the Balkans.
Liberation from Austria Hungary and Ottoman colonial
rule
Reductio ad absurdum
Despite all the blather, there is one essential fact. Saddam Hussein
cares only about himself. One defector said that the one thing that
is in every one of his residences is a biography of Stalin. His
absolute priority is his own power and survival. ALL outside
Plus who else does the world turn to when there is real trouble?
Kevin T.
I agree completely, which is why our Pax Americana authority is
valuable, PRECIOUS! Not to be squandered.
When we use it right, our position rises and allies gain willingness
to follow us. When we squander this
John Horn wrote:
From: Kevin Tarr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I guess there weren't enough deaths in Iraq for Clinton to
worry about that
country. Let's have another 11 years of stern warnings while
people die.
The first tower bombings, the embassies, the Cole. Let's warn
them some
53 matches
Mail list logo
