Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Transparency (Score 1) 95

Tea Party is a minority among right-wingers, but it's also the one that is most strongly pro-gun, and also the one that's most consistently emphasizing the "right to armed uprising". Mainstream Republicans are rather averse to such rhetoric (the politicians are another matter when they're pandering to electorate - they know that being seen as "pro-gun" will win them some fringe votes, but won't spook the mainstream enough to cost them more, especially when the other option is a Democrat).

Comment: Re:we doing it all wrong... (Score 1) 94

with a place like saudi arabia and all the bloody religious fanatic countries the ONLY thing we should export are BOOKS...books and fucking books again. And THEN after everyone damn reads them all and LEARN

What makes you think that Saudi Arabia would permit the kinds of books from which people might learn such things?

Remember how it went? "If these books contradict the Holy Qu'ran, then they are blasphemy - burn them. If these books are in agreement with the Holy Qu'ran, then they are superfluous - burn them."

Comment: Re:Heck, we probably already fund them (Score 1) 94

Yes. Thing is, if Israel really wanted to maximize Palestinian civilian casualties, they'd turn Gaza into rubble literally overnight, with casualties in hundreds of thousands. They certainly have the means - it being packed as dense as that, a few fuel-air bombs would cause immense casualties, without a single shot being fired in response.

Ironically, the fact that Palestinian casualties haven't even reached a thousand yet (and this includes the combatants) is ipso facto evidence that Israel is not deliberately targeting civilians as a matter of policy (though it doesn't mean that individual soldiers don't fire at civilians, by mistake or otherwise).

Comment: Re: Transparency (Score 1) 95

I'm not right wing, but I have to call you out on that. Most extreme right-wingers that I know - the kind that likes to talk about right to keep and bear arms as "means to fight back against a tyrannical government" - are actually pretty skeptical of PATRIOT Act, NSA surveillance, and all that stuff. Notice how a lot of recent attacks on the NSA came from Tea Party.

Comment: Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

The reason why Hamas rockets "didn't hit a single person" is because of a combination of interceptor systems, early launch detection, and well-developed civil defense in Israel. If rockets were fired in the same manner at Gaza, given the population density there, almost every single one would have found a target. Yet that would be exactly a tit-for-tat response.

You seem to be arguing that if a guy attacks me with a knife on the street, I can't use any force to defend myself until he actually manages to land a stab on me. If that's your notion of "proportional response", it's bullshit.

Comment: Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.

Er... are you implying that what Israel should do is fire its own Qassam-style rockets back at Gaza, using the same targeting principle (i.e. aim where the concentration of people is highest)?

Comment: Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks (Score 1) 379

Disproportionate response is a war crime.

The problem with this is that no-one seems to be able to coherently explain what a proportional response should look like. Every time I ask people, they immediately go into rant mode about "Israeli fascist" and "they've had that coming" etc. But no-one is willing to actually lay out the proper response to the rockets step-by-step.

No guidance systems.

They're still aimed, it's just that the target area is very wide. But in most cases, those target areas are city centers.

So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.

Not for the lack of trying. It's one of the reasons why I consider Hamas leadership basically insane - it's clear that what they're doing is just plainly not working, and is only making things worse for them, but they're doing it anyway.

Comment: Re:What about existing evidence? (Score 1) 213

by NoNonAlphaCharsHere (#47524065) Attached to: Black Holes Not Black After All, Theorize Physicists
Black holes and neutron stars are both examples of stellar remnants, where fusion has stopped, so they're not emitting nearly as much energy as previously, just residual effects of temperature, magnetism and gravity. In the case of black holes, we've been assuming that the radius had collapsed to the point where the escape velocity was greater than the speed of light, hence, "black". Even if that isn't the case, they're not necessarily going to be easy to spot.

The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that, you've got it made. -- Jean Giraudoux